The Defendant, by motion, seeks a dismissal of a Simplified Traffic Information alleging a violation of §1180(a) of the Vehicle and Traffic Law - Driving at a Speed Not Reasonable and Prudent.

It is alleged by Simplified Traffic Information that the Defendant, Kevante K. Loving, violated §1180(a) of the Vehicle and Traffic Law by Driving at a Speed Not Reasonable and Prudent, on North Avenue in the Town of Pleasant Valley, County of Dutchess and State of New York, at 11:55 p.m. on October 3, 2014. On October 14, 2014, the Defendant entered a "not guilty" plea by mail and requested a Supporting Deposition. This Court ordered a Supporting Deposition be supplied, and as a result a Supporting Deposition was timely served on November 6, 2014.

The Defendant, through counsel, argues the Supporting Deposition provided is defective because it lacks a specific allegation regarding the Defendant's speed at the time of the offense. The Defendant suggests that since the Supporting Deposition lacks such an allegation, it should be treated as if no Supporting Deposition was served at all. Alternatively, the Defendant contends the lack of a "speed" allegation renders the Simplified Information insufficient as a matter of law. Therefore, Defendant argues, the Court should dismiss the Supporting Deposition as insufficient on its face, See CPL §§100.25 and 100.40(2).. Pointing to the mandate of Criminal Procedure Law §100.40(2), the Defendant requests the Court dismiss the Simplified Information for the failure to provide a Supporting Deposition. Of course the dismissal would not be on the merits and the State Police Officer would be free to timely re-issue the Simplified Information.

Unlike serious criminal cases, traffic proceedings are commenced by the service of Simplified Information. Simplified Information, of course, is a statutory creation designed for [*2]handling a large volume of traffic infractions. The supplied information "need not provide on its face reasonable cause" to believe the charged offense was committed. People v. Nuccio, 78 NY2d 102 (1991). A Simplified Information in a traffic case has a different and lesser requirement for facial sufficiency then does a Misdemeanor Information. People v. Rose, 3 Misc 3d 184 (Dist. Ct. Nassau Cty., 2005). For these reasons, a Defendant in a traffic case is entitled to a Supporting Deposition as a matter of right. The combination of a Simplified Information together with a Supporting Deposition is sufficient to show "reasonable cause" to sustain a proceeding by alleging the requisite elements of the charged offense, and thereby stating a prima facie case for the People. People v. Inserra, 4 NY3d 30, 32 (2004).

The provisions of the Criminal Procedure Law provide general rules for a Supporting Deposition, however, they do not provide the Court with easily applicable guidance regarding what type of evidentiary facts are sufficient to provide such reasonable cause. The Supporting Deposition must be a separate document and is supposed to contain non-hearsay evidentiary facts tending to support the charged violation. The question of how detailed a Supporting Deposition must be could vary from case to case. All that can be discerned from the Criminal Procedure Law is a general rule that a Supporting Deposition must contain enough facts to allege all of the prerequisites of the offense specified in the statute and that non-hearsay allegations establish every element of the offense charged and the defendant's commission thereof. See, CPL §100.40. In other words, a Supporting Deposition is required to assert what the People must prove, not how they will prove it. Accordingly, a Supporting Deposition need not state all the evidentiary facts available to the deponent, but rather only enough facts to provide reasonable cause to believe the statute was violated by the Defendant, leaving for a trial the question of whether the People will be able to prove the violation. People v. Ortiz, 146 Misc 2d 594, 596 (Sup. Ct. App. Term, 1990). The Simplified Information together with the Supporting Deposition need not detail the People's case, but rather, must merely state enough to make out a prima facie case and provide the Defendant "reasonable information as to the nature and character of the crime charged". People v. Iannone, 45 NY2d 589, 597 (1978).

In the matter before this Court, the Supporting Deposition provided by State Police Officer Rose sets forth facts sufficient to establish reasonable cause to believe the statute was violated. It was further affirmed in the deposition, that the charge was based upon the officer's direct observation of the Defendant's operation of a motor vehicle on a specific roadway in the Town of Pleasant Valley, at a specific time and date. Accordingly, this Court will not dismiss the Simplified Traffic Information based on the allegation that the Supporting Deposition is insufficient.

This shall constitute the Decision and Order of the Court. The matter is scheduled for further appearances on April 7, 2015 at 5:30pm for the purpose of scheduling a Trial.

________________________________