At our firm, we scrutinize every aspect of a case to ensure that our clients receive the fair treatment they deserve. Recently, we secured the dismissal of Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) charges in Suffolk County District Court, proving once again that the prosecution must be held accountable for procedural compliance.
The Case: DWI Charges and a Critical Legal Error
Our client was charged with:
✅ VTL § 1192(2) – Driving with a Blood Alcohol Content (BAC) of 0.08% or higher
✅ VTL § 1192(3) – Driving While Intoxicated (Common Law)
✅ Additional traffic infractions, including failure to signal and unsafe lane change
Following the arrest, our client timely requested a supporting deposition—a sworn statement by the arresting officer providing details necessary to support the charges. Under CPL § 100.25, the prosecution had 30 days to serve the supporting deposition or risk dismissal of the charges.
Our Legal Strategy: Challenging the People’s Failure to Comply
We filed a motion to dismiss on the grounds that:
📌 The supporting deposition was not filed within the required timeframe, making the charges facially insufficient under CPL §§ 100.40(2) and 170.30(1)(a).
📌 The prosecution failed to properly serve the deposition, even though they claimed to have provided it in discovery. Under the law, mere inclusion in discovery is not enough—proof of service is required.
📌 The misdemeanor information filed after the original simplified traffic information could not retroactively cure the defect, as a misdemeanor information cannot supersede a defective simplified traffic information.
The Court’s Ruling: Dismissal of the DWI Charges
Judge Eric Sachs ruled in our favor, holding that:
🛑 The prosecution failed to serve the supporting deposition within the statutory deadline.
🛑 The failure to serve the supporting deposition rendered the charges legally insufficient, requiring dismissal.
🛑 The People’s argument that discovery compliance cured their error was rejected, as CPL 100.25 explicitly requires proof of service.
On January 8, 2025, the court dismissed the DWI charges without prejudice, meaning the prosecution could technically refile—but given the fundamental procedural failure, it would be unlikely.
Key Takeaway: Procedure Matters in DWI Cases
This case highlights a crucial aspect of criminal defense: just because someone is charged does not mean they will be convicted. The burden is on the prosecution to follow proper legal procedures, and when they fail, charges can be dismissed.
Charged with a DWI? We Can Help.
A DWI conviction can have serious consequences, from license suspension to steep fines and even jail time. If you or someone you know is facing a DWI or traffic-related charge, don’t plead guilty without speaking to a lawyer.
📞 Call us at (631) 724-5251 or visit arpinopc.com for a consultation.
🔹 We fight for your rights. We challenge every case. Let us protect your future.