People v. RamosPeople v. Ramos
Defendant‘s waiver of indictment and prosecution by superior court information was not jurisdictionally defective, where the entire waiver colloquy took place in open court, even if the record is ambiguous whether defendant signed the waiver document just before the plea proceeding or during it (see People v Moore, 137 AD3d 704 [1st Dept 2016], lv denied 27 NY3d 1136 [2016]). The written waiver is dated the same day as the plea proceeding, and defendant signed the waiver, which acknowledges that it was signed “in open court” in counsel‘s presence. Defense counsel also signed the document and confirmed it was signed in open court in his presence. The court also signed a statement on it which states that it is “satisfied that the waiver complies with [CPL] 195.10 and 195.20,” and approved the waiver (see People v Myers, 32 NY3d 18 [2018]).
Under the presumption of regularity, absent specific proof to the contrary, the law presumes that the requirements for a valid waiver of indictment (
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.
ENTERED: December 17, 2020