From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Frazier

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 22, 1991
175 A.D.2d 257 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

July 22, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Broomer, J.).


Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

On appeal, the defendant contends that his motion to dismiss Indictment No. 5695/87 on the ground that he was not afforded a speedy trial (see, CPL 30.30) was improperly denied. Pursuant to CPL 30.30 (1) (a), the People are required to announce their readiness for the trial of a felony within six months of the commencement of the criminal proceeding, less certain enumerated excludable periods (see, CPL 30.30; People v Kendzia, 64 N.Y.2d 331, 336). Criminal proceedings were commenced against the defendant on June 26, 1987, the day the felony complaint was filed (see, CPL 1.20; People v Osgood, 52 N.Y.2d 37, 40). After subtracting periods of delay not chargeable to the People, the period of unexcused delay is less than the statutorily mandated six-calendar-month time limit (see, CPL 30.30 [a]). In reaching this determination, we exclude from our computation the postreadiness period commencing on October 26, 1987, when the People announced their readiness on the record, to January 6, 1988, which period of delay was attributable to the defendant's filing of pretrial motions and did not affect the People's continued readiness for trial (see, CPL 30.30 [a]; People v Anderson, 66 N.Y.2d 529, 536).

The defendant next contends that certain of the prosecutor's remarks in summation deprived him of a fair trial. With respect to at least two of the challenged comments no objection was made by defense counsel and, therefore, any claims of errors with respect thereto have not been preserved for appellate review as a matter of law (see, CPL 470.05). To the extent the claimed errors are preserved for appellate review, any error is harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt.

In view of our determination, we do not reach any issue with respect to vacatur of the defendant's plea under Indictment No. 4247/87 (cf., People v Clark, 45 N.Y.2d 432). Thompson, J.P., Bracken, Harwood and Balletta, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Frazier

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 22, 1991
175 A.D.2d 257 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

People v. Frazier

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. LARRY FRAZIER…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jul 22, 1991

Citations

175 A.D.2d 257 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
573 N.Y.S.2d 913

Citing Cases

People v. Albrechtsen

"Whether the People have satisfied this obligation is generally determined by computing the time elapsed…

People v. Albrechtsen

"Whether the People have satisfied this obligation is generally determined by computing the time elapsed…