People v. Korovskyi

2024 NY Slip Op 51664(U)

The People of the State of New York v. Vasyl Korovskyi, Defendant.

No. 2024-51664, No. CR-005030-24KN

Criminal Court of the City of New York, Kings County

November 12, 2024

Unpublished Opinion

MOTION DECISION

Eric Gonzalez, District Attorney, Lauren Kuhn, Assistant District Attorney.

The Legal Aid Society, C.D.P., Perri Fagan, Esq., of counsel for the Defendant.

PATRICK HAYES TORRES, J.C.C.

Defendant moves for an order of dismissal on speedy trial grounds alleging that the Prosecution did not serve discovery until May 6, 2024, the 91st day of the speedy trial clock and that the omissions in the People's discovery render their certificate of compliance (COC) invalid and their statement of readiness (SOR) illusory.

Defendant's motion to dismiss is GRANTED.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On February 5, 2024, defendant was arraigned on a misdemeanor complaint charging Penal Law §165.40, Criminal Possession of Stolen Property in the Fifth degree, a class A misdemeanor. This commenced the running of the ninety-day period, less excludable time, within which the People must be ready for trial pursuant to the requirement of CPL §30.30 (1) (b). Therefore, the People's COC and SOR was due on or before Sunday, May 5, 2024, the 90th day of speedy trial time.

On Monday May 6, 2024, the 91st day of speedy trial time, the People served and filed off-calendar the following Certificate of Compliance ("COC"), Statement of Readiness, ("SOR"), Notice of Disclosure Form ("NDF") for Initial Discovery, Inventory of Discovery Provided Under CPL 245.20 and a Superseding Information.

On May 21, 2024, the case was advanced for non-compliance with BJI supervised release. A bench warrant was stayed, and the case was adjourned to May 23, 2024.

On May 23, 2024, the case was adjourned to July 15, 2024. On July 15, 2024, the Court set a motion schedule and adjourned to September 16, 2024, in part AP2.

On July 31, 2024, the defense served and filed the instant motion to invalidate the People's COC, deeming the People's SOR's illusory, or in the alternative failed to file their COC within 90 days in violation of CPL §30.30(1)(b).

On September 6, 2024, the 214th day of speedy trial time, the People filed a Supplemental COC attaching a Revised Addendum to Notice of Disclosure Form disclosing the name and contact information for civilian witness, pursuant to CPL 245.20 (1) (c). The Supplemental COC failed to detail the basis for the delayed disclosure.

On September 6, 2024, the People, also filed their response in opposition to the defense motion to dismiss. On September 20 2024, the defense filed a reply.

The defense asserts that the Prosecution's COC and discovery was untimely filed as they were served on Monday, May 6 2024, the 91st day of the speedy trial clock. The defense further challenged the People's COC and SOR as illusory for their purported discovery deficiencies.

The People conceded that although they did not turn over items listed by the defense, their COC should not be invalidated because the items are either not relevant to the subject matter of the case, not subject to automatic discovery, are items that are not in the control of the People or are items that do not exist. The People further contend that their COC was timely filed because the 90th day fell on a Sunday, and they subsequently filed on the next business day.

Timeliness of Filing the People's COC/SOR

The defense contends that the People's filing of their COC and SOR on Monday May 6, 2024, the 91st day, via the EDDS system was untimely filed. The People claimed that their COC, filed on Monday May 6, 2024, via the EDDS system on the 91st day, was timely filed because the due date fell on a Sunday and therefore their due date was automatically moved to the next business day, Monday May 6, 2024, pursuant to General Construction Law §25-A.

The Criminal Procedure Law contains no indication as to the effect of the last day of the CPL § 30.30 falling on a weekend. People v. Mandela, 142 A.D.3d 81 (3d Dep't 2016). The court looks to other statutes for guidance to determine whether the CPL § 30.30 time is affected if the deadline falls on a weekend. Notably, New York General Construction Law mandates that it must be applied "to every statute unless its general object, or the context of the language construed, or other provisions of law indicate that a different meaning or application was intended from that required to be given by this chapter." NY Gen Const Law § 110. Accordingly, the General Construction Law should be used to interpret the Criminal Procedure Law unless it would contradict the statute's language or provisions. See People v. Powell, 179 Misc.2d 1047 (App. Term 2nd Dep't 1999) leave to appeal denied 93 N.Y.2d 928 (1999).

General Construction Law §25-a, was added in 1952 and amended in 1964 and 1965. It provides that when the filing date falls on a "Saturday, Sunday, or public holiday, such act may be done on the next succeeding business day." NY Gen Const L § 25-a. When the current version of the speedy trial statute was first enacted in 1970, electronic filing did not exist. Thus, the courts, applying, General Construction Law, §25-a, extended the CPL § 30.30 speedy trial time to the next business day when the deadline fell on a weekend or holiday. See People v. Mandela, 142 A.D.3d 81 (3rd Dep't. 2016) (extending the CPL § 30.30 deadline to Tuesday while excluding Saturday, Sunday, and President's Day); People v. Powell, 179 Misc.2d 1047 (App. Term 2nd Dep't 1999) leave to appeal denied 93 N.Y.2d 928 (extending CPL § 30.30 time from Sunday to Monday); People v. Turner, 71 Misc.3d 1219 (A) (Sup. Ct., Monroe County 2021) (excluding Saturday and Sunday from the CPL § 30.30 time); People v. Obey, 80 Misc.3d 1223 (A) (Crim. Ct., Bronx County 2023) (extending CPL § 30.30 from Sunday to Monday).

Here, the issue presented is whether the People can validly announce their readiness when they file their SOR via EDDS on the first business day after the last day of statutorily required time period under CPL §30.30, (90th day) falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or holiday, when the court is presumably closed.

"[P]rior to EDDS there was no mechanism for filing SOR when court was not actually open for business." People v Kinch, 75 Misc.3d 741, 744 (Crim. Ct., Kings County 2022). To be ready for trial under speedy trial the People were required to answer ready in open court or file a notice of their readiness during business hours. Id at 744.

"The EDDS was established to safely ensure the proper delivery and filing of motions, documents, and notices with the court during the COVID19- pandemic. EDDS was created to fill the gap created by the absence of e-filing through New York State Courts Electronic Filing (NYSCEF). See 2024 Report of the Chief Administrative Judge to the Legislature, The Governor, and the Chief Judge of the State of New York; https:/iappscontent.courts.state.ny.us/NYSCEF/Live/Help/EFileReport.pdf. Electronic filing may be new to criminal court, but it has been in existence for about 25 years. Id. Unlike the prior-in -person system of filing with the court, this new electronic method does not require in-person filing with the court clerk, and thus, allows for submissions to be filed at any hour." People v McLean, 77 Misc.3d 492 (Crim. Ct., Kings County 2022)

In McLean the Court ruled that although the People filed their COC through EDDS after 5 pm when the courts are closed, "[g]iven the technology and resources available to parties today via EDDS, the concept of having a document filed with the court by 5:00 p.m., is in essence, an outdated legacy of prior practice when People v Kendzia, 64 N.Y.2d 331, 337 (1985) was decided." People v McLean, 77 Misc.3d 492 (Crim. Ct., Kings County 2022).

Thus, "... historically, an SOR could only be filed with the court clerk during the court's business hours; however, since the implementation of the EDDS, documents can now be submitted throughout the day and later be "deemed filed" by the clerk (see Uniform Rules for Trial Cts. [22 NYCRR] §202.5c [c] [3]). People v Licius, 82 Misc.3d 18, 21 (Sup. Ct., App. Term, 2nd Dept., 2, 11, 13 Jud Dist., 2023). "Thus, the People's announcement of readiness is valid at the time of filing in EDDS." People v Palma-Amaya, 80 Misc.3d 897 (Crim. Ct., Kings County 2023).

EDDS allows the People's COC and SOR documents to now be submitted throughout the weekend and holidays and later be deemed filed. Thus, with the advent of EDDS, the concept of having a document filed with the court on the next business day, rather than the due date, "is in essence an outdated legacy of a prior practice which may have had more relevance when Kendzia was decided. Thus, if an in-person filing of a SOR can take several days to be reviewed, accepted, and placed in the court file, deemed filed the day it is stamped, then placed in the court clerk's bin and deemed to fulfill the requirements of readiness in Kendzia, therefore, an electronic filing via EDDS should be treated no differently." People v McLean, 77 Misc.3d 492, 503 (Crim. Ct., Kings County, 2022).

"CPL 30.30 only requires that the People be ready for trial within a specified time period, here 90 days; the statute does not require that a trial be held within this time period. The court's inability to commence a trial does not excuse the People from timely declaring their readiness for trial." People v Licius, 82 Misc.3d 18 (Sup. Ct., App. Term, 2nd Dept., 2, 11, 13 Jud Dist., 2023)

In the instant matter, the People's CPL § 30.30 time began to run after defendant was arraigned and the 90th day fell on Sunday, May 5, 2024. Under current case law, the People were entitled to file their COC on the following business...