New York Court of Appeals, 1977

People v. Washington

New York Court of Appeals · Decided December 15, 1977

43 N.Y.2d 772; 372 N.E.2d 795; 401 N.Y.S.2d 1007; 1977 N.Y. LEXIS 2560

Cases that cite this one

58 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.

People v. Spector (Criminal Court of the City of New York 1999)
People v. Bryant (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1978)
People v. Ebbecke (New York Supreme Court 1979)
People v. Ricart (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
People v. Rahoman (Criminal Court of the City of New York 2016)
People v. Juan R. (New York Supreme Court 1992)
People v. Williams (New York Supreme Court 1990)
People v. Lopez (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1980)
People v. Capparelli (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1979)
People v. Stanton (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1979)
People v. Cook (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1978)
People v. Beason (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2025)
People v. Cruz (Raphael) (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
People v. Friday (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2018)
People v. Gonzalez (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
People v. Cox (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
The People v. Nnamdi Clarke (N.Y. 2016)
People v. Hashim (Criminal Court of the City of New York 2015)
People v. Silverstri (Criminal Court of the City of New York 2015)
People v. Clarke (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
People v. Ocasio (New York Supreme Court 2013)
People v. Rahim (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
People v. Chardon (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)
People v. Price (N.Y. 2010)
People v. Price (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2009)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Order reversed, and the indictment dismissed. The seven-month delay between defendant’s felony indictment and his arrest constitutes a denial of the statutory right to a speedy trial (CPL 30.30, subd 1, par [a]).

The People contend that the delay was caused by "exceptional circumstances”, and hence falls within a statutory exception (CPL 30.30, subd 4, par [g]). They urge as an excuse an ongoing narcotics investigation. However, the proof of such investigation was deficient. No activity of any significance was *774shown, but only a variety of unsatisfactory excuses why the investigation did not proceed. Statutory examples of exceptional circumstances would entail at least probable availability of new evidence within a reasonable period of time, and a justified need for additional time to prepare the People’s case. The statutory exception, then, if it is to be given reasonable effect and it is to fulfill the legislative purpose, must be limited to instances in which the prosecution’s inability to proceed is justified by the purposes of the investigation and credible, vigorous activity in pursuing it.

Since the indictment must be dismissed, it is unnecessary to determine whether the court’s erroneous characterization of a defense witness, in a supplementary charge, as "an admitted interested party”, would otherwise require a new trial.

Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur in memorandum.

Order reversed, etc.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.