The Fourth Department noted that the fact that the statutory speedy trial period had expired at the time the bench warrant was executed did not invalidate the arrest for resisting arrest:
[I]t is undisputed that the warrant was facially valid, and it necessarily follows that the officer was authorized to arrest defendant for purposes of the resisting arrest statute … .
… [T]he fact that the statutory speedy trial period had expired on the charge underlying the bench warrant did not vitiate the warrant’s facial validity and thereby negate the officer’s authority to execute it for purposes of the resisting arrest statute … . Indeed, it is well established that an officer’s authority to arrest does not hinge on the ultimate success of the underlying prosecution, if any … . People v Lowman, 2019 NY Slip Op 04823, Fourth Dept 6-14-19