People v. Goss

Fallon and Wesley, JJ. (dissenting).

We respectfully dissent. For the reasons set forth by the dissent in People v Avery (214 AD2d 1018 [decided herewith]), we conclude that the majority in this case has incorrectly interpreted People v England (84 NY2d 1) to mean that the People cannot validly declare readiness until a defendant’s scheduled arraignment.

The majority’s conclusion that the period between the People’s declaration of readiness when the indictment was filed and defendant’s scheduled arraignment is chargeable to the People, and was not attributable to court congestion, is without…