41 A.D.2d 204 (N.Y. App. Div. 1973)
r
r
A trial court may dismiss an indictment in furtherance of justice when, after considering specific statutory factors, prosecution would not serve a useful purpose.
r
r
Summary
r
This case concerns the dismissal of an indictment “in furtherance of justice” under New York Criminal Procedure Law § 210.40, based on consideration of ten statutory factors. The Appellate Division reversed the trial court’s refusal to dismiss. The Court of Appeals dismissed a further appeal, holding that the Appellate Division’s reversal was based on its independent weighing and factual evaluation of the statutory factors, which does not present a question of law alone reviewable by the Court of Appeals.
r
r
Facts
r
The specific facts underlying the indictment are not detailed in this decision, as the focus is solely on the propriety of the dismissal “in furtherance of justice.” The case reached the Appellate Division following a determination in the trial court. The key factual element is the circumstances of the case as they relate to the ten statutory factors outlined in CPL 210.40(1)(a)-(j), which the Appellate Division independently evaluated.
r
r
Procedural History
r
The defendant was indicted. The trial court refused to dismiss the indictment in furtherance of justice. The Appellate Division reversed, ordering dismissal based on its own factual evaluation of the statutory factors. The People appealed to the New York Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal, citing a lack of jurisdiction because the reversal was not based solely on a question of law.
r
r
Issue(s)
r
Whether the Appellate Division’s reversal of the trial court’s decision not to dismiss the indictment in the furtherance of justice was based solely on a question of law, thus giving the Court of Appeals jurisdiction to hear a further appeal.
r
r
Holding
r
No, because the Appellate Division’s decision was based on its independent weighing and factual evaluation of the circumstances in relation to the ten statutory factors, which is not reviewable by the Court of Appeals under CPL 450.90(2)(a).
r
r
Court’s Reasoning
r
The Court of Appeals based its decision on the limited scope of its appellate jurisdiction. Under CPL 450.90(2)(a), the Court of Appeals can only hear appeals from the Appellate Division where the latter’s determination is