You are here: / / WAIVER OF INDICTMENT WAS JURISDICTIONALLY DEFECTIVE BECAUSE IT DID NOT...

WAIVER OF INDICTMENT WAS JURISDICTIONALLY DEFECTIVE BECAUSE IT DID NOT INCLUDE THE TIME AND PLACE OF THE OFFENSE (THIRD DEPT).

The Third Department, reversing defendant’s conviction by guilty plea, determined the waiver of indictment was jurisdictionally defected because the time and place of the offense were not included:

… [A] waiver of indictment must be executed in strict compliance with CPL 195.20, which specifically requires, as is relevant here, that it set forth the “date and approximate time and place of each offense to be charged in the [SCI]” … . Although the statutory requirements of CPL 195.20 may be satisfied by reading the waiver of indictment and the SCI [superior court information] as a single document, here, neither document set forth the time of the charged offense (see CPL 195.20 …). Further, “this is not a ‘situation where the time of the offense is unknown or, perhaps, unknowable’ so as to excuse the absence of such information” … . Indeed, the felony complaint contains information regarding the time that the offense occurred … . We find unavailing the People’s assertion that reference in the waiver of the indictment to the underlying felony complaint, which contains the time of the offense, to be sufficient to comply with the clear and simple statutorily-required information. In view of the foregoing, the waiver of indictment and the related SCI are jurisdictionally defective, thereby requiring that the plea be vacated and the SCI dismissed … . People v Walley, 2019 NY Slip Op 07816, Third Dept 10-31-19

 

You might also like
ARBITRATOR’S INTERIM DECISION RE PETITIONER’S SUSPENSION WITHOUT PAY WAS IMPROPER, AND THE ARBITRATOR’S DISMISSAL OF THE CHARGES VIOLATED PUBLIC POLICY, THIRD DEPT PROVIDED A COMPREHENSIVE DISCUSSION OF A COURT’S POWER TO REVIEW AN ARBITRATOR’S DECISION (THIRD DEPT).
Relocation Criteria Explained
People Failed to Demonstrate Seizure of Heroin from Defendant’s Impounded Vehicle Was Pursuant to a Standard Inventory Search—Heroin Should Have Been Suppressed
CLAIMANT’S BEHAVIOR, ALLEGED TO HAVE CONSTITUTED HARASSMENT AND INSUBORDINATION, DID NOT RISE TO THE LEVEL OF DISQUALIFYING MISCONDUCT, CLAIMANT WAS ENTITLED TO UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE BENEFITS (THIRD DEPT).
TOWN’S PUBLIC ROAD EASEMENT IS THREE RODS WIDE AND IS NOT CONFINED TO THE PAVED PORTION OF THE ROAD.
Codefendant’s Statement Was Admissible—the Fact that the Statement Implicated the Defendant in the Light of Other Trial Evidence Did Not Violate Defendant’s Right of Confrontation
Where Jail Time Is Contemplated as Punishment for Disobeying an Order of Protection, the Standard of Proof for Willful Contempt is “Beyond a Reasonable Doubt”
Premises Clause Prevails Over Habendum Clause in a Deed/Failure to Expressly Label Parties and Include the Parties’ Addresses Does Not Invalidate a Deed

Categories

Sign Up for the Mailing List to Be Notified When the Site Is Updated.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Copyright © 2026 New York Appellate Digest, Inc.
Site by CurlyHost | Privacy Policy

FAMILY COURT SHOULD NOT HAVE DELEGATED AUTHORITY TO FATHER CONCERNING VISITATION... POLICE OFFICER’S WARRANTLESS ENTRY INTO A METH LAB WAS JUSTIFIED BY WHAT...