People v. Филипс, 69 N.Y.2d 411 (1987)

A preprinted supporting deposition form containing check marks indicating observed conditions and behaviors can satisfy the factual allegation requirements of CPL 100.20 and 100.25(2) in a DWI case.

Summary

The New York Court of Appeals held that a standardized, preprinted supporting deposition used in a DWI case, which utilized check marks to indicate observations of the defendant’s condition, was sufficient to meet the requirements of CPL 100.20 and 100.25(2). The court reasoned that the check marks adequately communicated factual allegations supporting the charge of driving while intoxicated. The court reversed the lower courts’ decisions, which had dismissed the charge based on the perceived insufficiency of the deposition form. This case clarifies that supporting depositions do not necessarily require narrative descriptions, so long as they provide reasonable cause to believe the defendant committed the charged offense.

Facts

On September 20, 1985, the defendant was arrested for driving while intoxicated (DWI). The People served and filed a supporting deposition using a preprinted form labeled “Supporting Deposition & DWI Bill of Particulars & 710.30 Notice.” This form contained spaces for general information, chemical test results, and a checklist of police observations regarding the defendant’s behavior before and after the stop. The arresting officer marked boxes next to observations he deemed applicable to the defendant.

Procedural History

The Town Court granted the defendant’s motion to suppress the supporting deposition, deeming it insufficient because it was a checklist and did not contain factual allegations in the officer’s own words. Consequently, the Town Court dismissed the DWI charge under CPL 30.30, finding that the People’s statement of readiness was a nullity because it was based on the insufficient deposition. The County Court affirmed the Town Court’s decision. The People appealed to the New York Court of Appeals by leave of a Judge of that court.

Issue(s)

Whether a preprinted supporting deposition form, using check marks to indicate observations, contains sufficient factual allegations to satisfy the requirements of CPL 100.20 and 100.25(2) for a DWI charge.

Holding

Yes, because the check marks on the preprinted form effectively communicate factual allegations of an evidentiary character that support the DWI charge and provide reasonable cause to believe the defendant committed the offense.

Court’s Reasoning

The Court of Appeals reasoned that a supporting deposition must be a written instrument containing factual allegations of an evidentiary character that supplement the accusatory instrument and provide reasonable cause to believe the defendant committed the offense. The court stated, “Here, the factual statements in the deposition are communicated by check marks made in boxes next to the applicable conditions and observations signifying the complainant’s allegations as to the existence of those conditions and the truth of those observations. We hold such signification sufficient to meet the requirements of CPL 100.20.” The court found that the deposition, which alleged erratic driving, speeding, glassy eyes, slurred speech, impaired motor coordination, a smell of alcohol, and the defendant’s admission to drinking and driving between bars, met the statutory requirements. The court emphasized that the form contained sufficient factual allegations to provide reasonable cause to believe the defendant was intoxicated while driving. The court effectively validated a standardized approach to drafting supporting depositions in DWI cases, streamlining the process for law enforcement. There were no dissenting or concurring opinions noted.