The Defendant, Jack Allen is charged with Aggravated Unlicensed Operator in the 2nd Degree/ Mandatory Suspension (VTL-511.2A3), Operating Out of Class (VTL-509.2), Unlicensed Operator (VTL-509.1) from January 6, 2015. Aggravated Unlicensed Operator 2nd Degree (VTL-511.2A2), Unlicensed Operator (VTL-509.1), Operating Out of Class (VTL-509.2) and No Headlamps Passenger Side (VTL-375.2A) from March 2, 2015. On August 17, 2015, Defendant moved to dismiss the simplified information for lack of facial sufficiency because the People had failed to supply the supporting depositions within 30 days. Defendant further moved to dismiss the simplified information on speedy trial grounds, claiming that because the supporting depositions were not supplied, the People's March 18th statement of readiness was illusory. The People argued that the motion to dismiss was untimely, that is, beyond the 45 day limit provided in CPL §255.20. On September 10, 2015, this Court ruled on the motions, holding that the controlling case is People v Key, 45 NY 2nd 111 (1978). In that case, the Court of Appeals held that a motion to dismiss for lack of a supporting deposition, like all other pre-trial motions, must made be within 45 days or such additional time as the Court may provide as set forth in NY CPL §255.20. The Court further found that while the Defendant had a right to a supporting deposition, failure to move to dismiss within the 45 days resulted in a waiver. People v Key, supra. The Court finally held that since a Defendant can be prosecuted on a simplified information without a supporting deposition, the People's statement [*2]of readiness was not illusory.

On September 16, 2015, Defendant filed a motion to reconsider arguing that, "A motion to dismiss for lack of a supporting deposition falls within that small category of motions that must be allowed after 45 days" under CPL § 255.20, the statute quoted and interpreted in People v. Key, supra. The pertinent part of CPL §255.20 states:

1. Except as otherwise expressly provided by law, whether the defendant is

represented by counsel or elects to proceed pro se, all pre-trial motions shall

be served or filed within forty-five days after arraignment and before

commencement of trial, or within such additional time as the court may

fix upon application of the defendant made prior to entry of judgment.

NY Crim. Proc. Law §255.20 (emphasis added)

Defendant argues a motion to dismiss for lack of a supporting a deposition "must" be allowed after 45 days because a Defendant may request a supporting deposition up to 30 days from the appearance date set forth on the ticket. Since the police have 30 days to respond, a timely motion, in some cases, would not be possible. In those cases, a Defendant should request an enlargement of time under CPL §255.20.

Here, Defendant made a request for a supporting deposition on March 18th, at arraignment with Counsel. At no time during the next 31 to 45 days did Defendant make a motion to dismiss or request an enlargement of time to make a motion to dismiss, thereby preserving his right to make a motion outside the time limit set forth in CPL §255.20.The motion was made six months after the supporting deposition request, and no reason is given for the delay. So, while Counsel is correct that the potential timing of a motion to dismiss for lack of a supporting deposition may, in some cases, need to be made outside the 45 day time limit, no request for enlargement of time was made here, and no "good cause" has been shown for the significant delay in making the motion. People v. Crocket, 30 AD3d 768 (3d Dept, 2006). Simply put, no reason has been argued for the untimeliness of the motion, nor has Defendant argued he has been prejudiced. Indeed, as the People state, the Defendant is entitled to discovery, and abandonment of the supporting deposition request may be a reasonable trial strategy. People v. Atkins, 107 AD3d 1465 (4th Dept., 2013).

Accordingly, after due reconsideration, the Court hereby denies the Defendant's motion to reconsider this Court's Decision of September 10, 2015.This constitutes the Decision of the Court entered upon notice to both parties. A notice of appeal, if applicable, must be filed within thirty (30) days of the date of this decision.