Your guide to NYC's public proceedings.
Q&A
Perspective on dismissal rates in misdemeanor cases
8:51:49
ยท
3 min
Council Member Yusef Salaam asks for the defense bar's perspective on the district attorneys' claims of higher dismissal rates in misdemeanor cases due to technicalities related to discovery laws.
- Defense attorneys argue that DAs are misattributing dismissals to discovery issues
- They explain that many dismissals are due to other factors, such as lack of supporting depositions
- The importance of discovery in preventing unlawful convictions is emphasized
Yusef Salaam
8:51:49
And I just have a last question for this panel.
8:51:51
Can you please give us your perspective on this DA's have claimed larger dismissal rates on misdemeanor cases based on technicalities.
8:52:02
Is this what you see as the defense bar?
Alvin Bragg
8:52:07
Well,
Anthony Martone
8:52:10
I think what the prosecutors are doing in in in anticipation of an argument to remove the law is that everything that gets dismissed, they're just blaming on dismissals as far as discovery.
8:52:21
If a complaining witness doesn't come forward within that same ninety days on an a misdemeanor or sixty days on a b misdemeanor and they don't have a supporting deposition, that case gets dismissed.
8:52:31
That happened all the time prior to discovery laws and after the discovery laws.
8:52:37
But what the DAs are doing, you can manipulate numbers to anything you want them to say.
8:52:41
They're all they're just clustering them into dismissals as to and and attributing them to discovery dismissals.
8:52:49
Now, did they give discovery in those cases?
8:52:50
No.
8:52:51
Because they noted they knew they weren't getting a supporting deposition.
8:52:54
So they'll put down that no discovery we couldn't get the discovery over so the case is dismissed.
8:52:58
It could be insufficiency and they'll say they didn't turn over discovery.
8:53:02
Therefore, the case gets dismissed on discovery issues.
8:53:04
There's and I think it's calculated differently with felonies and misdemeanors.
8:53:08
Pretty much all misdemeanors, they just attribute to lack of discovery.
8:53:12
Because the felony dismissals aren't happening, they really can't do that.
8:53:15
And there are studies in OCA and other studies that you can look at that shows quite clearly that dismissals are actually down in some counties.
8:53:23
And, the reason why they're down because it's not because of discovery.
8:53:26
I was on trial in the middle of a trial.
8:53:28
I got three discoveries during trial.
8:53:31
I made three challenges to the certificate of compliance.
8:53:35
It did not get dismissed even though it was happening in the middle of the trial.
8:53:38
The judge said take overnight, take a look at it, I'm not dismissing the case.
8:53:41
That's a fallacy thinking that felonies are getting dismissed because of discovery.
8:53:45
And it's it's outrageous that I sat here for some of this today that there were actually government officials saying that people who are accused of a crime should not get the discovery which could then lead to unlawful convictions.
8:53:59
And we know that's been a fact.
8:54:01
That's been proven.
8:54:02
Lack of discovery leads to unlawful convictions.
8:54:05
Why would someone have to sit in jail for twenty, thirty years and then say, oh, we should have turned that over.
8:54:09
It's outrageous to even go near that.
Juval Scott
8:54:13
I'd also just add that I think we have to be careful and steer clear of naming a prosecutor's inability to meet their constitutional obligation a technicality.
8:54:30
It's not a technicality.
8:54:32
And so I think we have to be really careful when we when we frame it that way.
8:54:37
They have an obligation to the public.
8:54:38
They have an obligation to the accused.
8:54:41
And so they have to meet that obligation.
8:54:44
When they don't, there is a process, there are laws, there are things that happen on the other side of that.
8:54:50
That's not a technicality, it's the rule of law.
Yusef Salaam
8:55:01
Well definitely thank you for your testimony.