People v. Felice, 78 N.Y.2d 876 (1991)
When a local criminal court fails to file a return on appeal after being ordered to do so, the appellate court has the discretion to deem the defendant’s allegations of error admitted and decide the appeal on the merits based on the defendant’s affidavit of errors alone.
Summary
This case addresses the procedural gap in New York’s Criminal Procedure Law regarding appeals from local criminal courts when no stenographic record exists. After the defendant’s conviction in Town Justice Court and the Justice Court’s failure to file a timely return on the defendant’s affidavit of errors (despite a court order), the County Court deemed the defendant’s allegations of error admitted and reversed the conviction. The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the County Court did not abuse its discretion in fashioning this remedy, given the lower court’s continued non-compliance and the lack of statutory guidance on the consequences of failing to file the return.
Facts
The defendant was convicted of third-degree assault in Town Justice Court after unsuccessfully seeking to have the proceedings recorded. He filed a notice of appeal and an affidavit of errors. The original Town Justice retired, and his successor filed a return with the County Clerk’s office, but neither party was served with copies as required by CPL 460.10(3)(d). The defendant, unaware of the return, moved for an order directing the filing of a return or for dismissal. The County Court directed the Justice Court to file a return, but no response was made.
Procedural History
1. Town Justice Court: Defendant convicted of third-degree assault.
2. County Court: (a) Directed the Justice Court to file a return after the initial failure to do so. (b) Upon continued failure, deemed the defendant’s allegations of error admitted, reversed the conviction, and remanded for further proceedings.
3. Court of Appeals: Affirmed the County Court’s order.
Issue(s)
Whether the County Court abused its discretion by deeming the defendant’s allegations of error admitted when the local criminal court failed to file a return on appeal after being ordered to do so, and then reversing the conviction based solely on the affidavit of errors.
Holding
Yes, because in the absence of statutory direction for the consequences of failing to file a return, and given the defendant’s diligent efforts to secure compliance with the Criminal Procedure Law, the County Court acted within its discretion in deeming the allegations of error admitted. The Court of Appeals further stated it was not an abuse of discretion as “it certainly was not the defendant, and he should not suffer because of this inaction on the part of State officials.”