The following excerpt is from People v. Mangual, 55 N.Y.S.3d 694 (Table) (N.Y. Crim. Ct. 2017):
On November 5, 2014, the People served and filed their response to the defendant's motion, and the court rendered its decision the same day. The case was adjourned to December 4, 2014 for hearings. The defendant does not contend that this adjournment period is chargeable to the People (see People v. Beasley, 16 NY3d 289, 293 [2011] [defendant's duty on a speedy-trial motion is to draw the court's attention to specific periods chargeable to the People] ). 0 days are included.
On December 4, 2014, the People were not ready for trial and requested an adjournment to December 8, 2014. The case was adjourned to February 9, 2015 for hearings. 4 days are included (People v. Betancourt, 217 A.D.2d 462, 464 [1st Dept 1995] [People charged only with time they request in the post-readiness context] ).
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.