Creates new procedures in relation to revocation of orders of recognizance.
Ayes (62): Adams, Addabbo, Alesi, Avella, Ball, Bonacic, Breslin, Carlucci, DeFrancisco, Diaz, Dilan, Duane, Espaillat, Farley, Flanagan, Fuschillo, Gallivan, Gianaris, Golden, Griffo, Grisanti, Hannon, Hassell-Thomps, Huntley, Johnson, Kennedy, Klein, Krueger, Kruger, Lanza, Larkin, LaValle, Libous, Little, Marcellino, Martins, Maziarz, McDonald, Montgomery, Nozzolio, O'Mara, Oppenheimer, Parker, Peralta, Perkins, Ranzenhofer, Ritchie, Rivera, Robach, Saland, Sampson, Savino, Serrano, Seward, Skelos, Smith, Squadron, Stavisky, Stewart-Cousin, Valesky, Young, Zeldin
TITLE OF BILL: An act to amend the criminal procedure law, in relation to revocation of orders of recognizance
This is one in a series of measures being introduced at the request of the Chief Administrative Judge upon the recommendation of her Advisory Committee on Criminal Law and Procedure.
This measure would amend the Criminal Procedure Law ("CPL") to authorize a court to review an order of recognizance issued pursuant to section 180.80 when the defendant subsequently fails to appear in court as required. It also provides that a new section 180.80 period apply if the court revokes the order of recognizance and commits the defendant to the custody of the sheriff.
CPL 180.80 currently provides that a court must release a defendant "on his own recognizance" where the defendant has been held in custody on a felony complaint for more than 120 hours without a disposition of the felony complaint or commencement of a felony hearing (the period is extended to 144 hours where a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday occurs during the custodial period). However, when a defendant released pursuant to CPL 180.80 fails to appear in court at a subsequent time, courts customarily issue a bench warrant to compel a defendant's appearance. When the defendant is ultimately returned to court, a new securing order is then issued. In many cases, courts will then fix a new CPL 180.80 period, giving the prosecution additional time to dispose of the felony complaint by plea or indictment, or else commence a preliminary hearing.
While this approach is practical, it is not expressly authorized by any provision in the Criminal Procedure Law. In the absence of any express authorization, many courts adopt the procedures used to revoke orders of recognizance under CPL 530.60. That section, however provides that "whenever in the course of a criminal action or proceeding, a defendant is at liberty as a result of an order of recognizance or bail issued pursuant to this article, and the court considers it necessary to review such order, it may, and by a bench warrant if necessary, require the defendant to appear before the court. . . " (emphasis added). Orders of recognizance issued pursuant to Article 180, however, do not come within the ambit of Article 530.
Additionally, when a defendant is ultimately returned to court and a new securing order is issued, it is unclear whether the court is required to issue a new release order if the prosecution again does not timely dispose of the felony complaint or commence a preliminary hearing. Arguably, by failing to return to court as required, a defendant has waived any right to the protection of CPL 180.80. However, the underlying purpose of CPL 180.80 is to insure that a person is not unreasonably held in custody on the basis of a hearsay felony complaint. When a person is initially released from custody because the People were unable to secure an indictment or commence a preliminary hearing in a timely manner, any significant additional
delay suggests that the People may be unable to present competent evidence that the defendant has committed an offense.
We believe that it is appropriate to limit the People to an additional 120 hours (144 hours if defendant is held over a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday) to either dispose of the felony complaint or commence a preliminary healing. However, in order to reduce the risk that the People will not learn that a defendant has been picked up on a warrant or is otherwise in custody on another matter, this measure provides for the new period to commence from the time the court revokes the order of recognizance and commits the defendant to the custody of the sheriff.
This measure, which would have no meaningful fiscal impact on the State, would take effect 30 days after it shall have become law.
2011 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: None. New proposal.
STATE OF NEW YORK ________________________________________________________________________ 4469 2011-2012 Regular Sessions IN SENATE April 6, 2011 ___________Introduced by Sen. NOZZOLIO -- (at request of the Office of Court Admin- istration) -- read twice and ordered printed, and when printed to be committed to the Committee on Codes AN ACT to amend the criminal procedure law, in relation to revocation of orders of recognizance THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEM- BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Subdivision 1 of section 530.60 of the criminal procedure law, as designated by chapter 788 of the laws of 1981, is amended to read as follows: 1. Whenever in the course of a criminal action or proceeding a defend- ant is at liberty as a result of an order of recognizance or bail issued pursuant to this
[article]CHAPTER, and the court considers it necessary to review such order, it may, and by a bench warrant if necessary, require the defendant to appear before the court. Upon such appearance, the court, for good cause shown, may revoke the order of recognizance or bail. If the defendant is entitled to recognizance or bail as a matter of right, the court must issue another such order. If he OR SHE is not, the court may either issue such an order or commit the defendant to the custody of the sheriff. WHERE THE DEFENDANT IS COMMITTED TO THE CUSTODY OF THE SHERIFF AND IS HELD ON A FELONY COMPLAINT, A NEW PERIOD AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 180.80 OF THIS CHAPTER SHALL COMMENCE TO RUN FROM THE TIME OF THE DEFENDANT'S COMMITMENT UNDER THIS SUBDIVISION. S 2. This act shall take effect on the thirtieth day after it shall have become law.EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets [ ] is old law to be omitted. LBD09512-01-1