| People of State of New York v Laura A. Smith |
| Motion No: 2018-00592 SCR |
| Slip Opinion No: 2022 NY Slip Op 62662(U) |
| Decided on March 4, 2022 |
| Appellate Term, Second Department, Motion Decision |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This motion is uncorrected and is not subject to publication in the Official Reports. |
of the State of New York for the 9th & 10th Judicial Districts
JERRY GARGUILO, P.J.
ELIZABETH H. EMERSON
TIMOTHY S. DRISCOLL, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER ON MOTION
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Laura A. Smith, Appellant. |
Appeal from judgments of conviction of the District Court of Suffolk County, Suffolk County Traffic and Parking Violations Agency, rendered January 23, 2018. By decision and order of this court dated December 14, 2020, on the court's own motion, this appeal was stricken from the appeals calendar because, among other things, the transcript of an oral argument referenced in a December 11, 2017 order which appellant sought to have reviewed on her appeal from the judgments had not been included in the record. By decision and order of this court dated September 22, 2021, on the court's own motion, the parties were directed to show cause before this court why the appeal should or should not be dismissed for failure to timely perfect. Both parties have submitted responding papers.
Upon the order to show cause and the papers filed in response thereto, and on the court's own motion, it is
ORDERED that the motion to dismiss the appeal is denied; and it is further,
ORDERED that the appeal from the judgments rendered January 23, 2018 is restored to the appeals calendar; and it is further,
ORDERED that appellant is directed to re-serve and re-file her appellant's brief within 10 days from the date of this decision and order; and it is further,
ORDERED that respondent, if it be so advised, may serve and file a respondent's brief within 10 days from the re-service of the appellant's brief; and it is further,
ORDERED that appellant, if she be so advised, may serve and file a reply brief within 7 days from the service of the respondent's brief.
This court previously directed the parties to show cause why the appeal should or should not be dismissed because appellant sought review of an order dated December 11, 2017 which stated that it was based upon, among other things, oral argument, and the minutes of oral argument had not been provided to this court. A review of appellant's lengthy submission in response to this court's September 22, 2021 order to show cause reveals that, on June 2, 2021, the District Court of Suffolk County, Suffolk County Traffic and Parking Violations Agency, issued a decision and order on motion referencing a prior order which had denied appellant's motion to reconstruct the minutes of oral argument. The June 2, 2021 order states, in effect, that the oral argument referenced in the December 11, 2017 order was not, in fact, oral argument on the motion. This court has never been provided with a copy of the order denying appellant's motion to reconstruct the minutes of the purported oral argument, and it was first made aware of both that order and the June 2, 2021 order when appellant annexed the June 2, 2021 order to its October 2021 submission to this court.
ENTER:
Paul Kenny
Chief Clerk