People v. Smith, 79 N.Y.2d 986 (1992)
A transcript of an electronically recorded probation revocation hearing, when filed with the County Court as part of the record on appeal, satisfies the requirement for a court’s return under CPL 460.10(3)(d) if the affidavit of errors can be resolved by reference to the transcript and the transcript is not claimed to be incomplete or inaccurate.
Summary
Defendant appealed his conviction for violating probation, arguing that the intermediate appellate court proceedings were flawed due to the trial court’s failure to file a return as required by CPL 460.10(3)(d). The New York Court of Appeals affirmed the County Court’s order, holding that the transcript of the electronically recorded probation revocation hearing, filed with the County Court as part of the record on appeal, satisfied the statutory requirement for a court’s return. The Court emphasized that there was no claim that the affidavit of errors included contentions unresolvable by the transcript or that the transcript was incomplete or inaccurate.
Facts
The defendant was convicted of violating the terms and conditions of his probation. The underlying proceedings of the probation revocation hearing were electronically recorded, as no court stenographer was present. On appeal to the County Court, the transcript of the electronic recording was filed as part of the record.
Procedural History
The defendant appealed the probation violation conviction to an intermediate appellate court, arguing a procedural defect based on the trial court’s failure to file a formal return as required by CPL 460.10(3)(d). The County Court affirmed the conviction. The defendant then appealed to the New York Court of Appeals.
Issue(s)
Whether the transcript of an electronically recorded probation revocation hearing, filed with the County Court, satisfies the requirement of a court’s return under CPL 460.10(3)(d) when the underlying proceedings were not recorded by a court stenographer.
Holding
Yes, because the transcript of the electronic recording of the defendant’s probation revocation hearing, which was filed with the County Court as part of the record on appeal, satisfies the requirements of CPL 460.10(3)(d) where the affidavit of errors does not include contentions that cannot be resolved by reference to the transcript, and the transcript is not claimed to be incomplete or inaccurate.
Court’s Reasoning
The Court of Appeals reasoned that CPL 460.10(3)(d) requires the court’s return to set forth or summarize evidence, facts, or occurrences from the proceedings that form the factual basis for the contentions in the affidavit of errors. Here, the transcript of the probation revocation hearing served this purpose. The court emphasized that the defendant did not claim that the affidavit of errors contained issues that the transcript could not resolve or that the transcript was incomplete or inaccurate. The court cited CPL 460.10(3)(e), noting that the remedy for a defective return is an order directing the lower court to file an amended return, which was not sought in this case. Since the transcript adequately provided the factual foundation for the defendant’s contentions, the statutory requirement was satisfied. The Court effectively treated the transcript as a sufficient substitute for a formal return under the specific circumstances of this case.