Legal Opinion
People v. Bargerstock
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided April 14, 1993PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: There is no merit to defendant’s contention that he was denied a speedy trial pursuant to CPL 30.30. The People declared their readiness for trial on several occasions before the expiration of the statutory time period. The fact that the laboratory results of the rape kit were not available until after expiration of the statutory period does not require a finding that the People were not ready to proceed (see, People v Kendzia, 64 NY2d 331, 337). At the time they first announced their readiness for trial, the People were prepared to present a prima…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- People v. GloverNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
- People v. TaranovichNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
- People v. AntommarchiNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
- People v. KendziaNew York Court of Appeals · 1985
- People v. MitchellNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
3Cited by11 opinions
- People v. WatkinsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
- People v. Van HoesenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
- People v. FulmerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- People v. HendrixAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
- People v. SibbliesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.