Legal Opinion
People v. Neal
New York Supreme Court
Decided January 4, 1994PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Rena K. Uviller, J.
Speedy trial motions have become a Judge’s, if not a litigant’s, nightmare. The opaque language of CPL 30.30 resists clarification by judicial interpretation. What follows is yet another attempt to understand this misbegotten statute.
A warrant was outstanding against the defendant for a significant period of time which the People seek to exclude from speedy trial calculation. If the defendant was actively avoiding apprehension or prosecution during any portion of that time, were the People thereby relieved of the obligation to exercise due diligence in…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- People v. SturgisNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
- People v. BoldenNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
- People v. BoldenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- People v. DavisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- People v. QuilesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- People v. DavisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994