People v. Nesci, 178 Misc. 2d 685 (N.Y. App. Term. 1998). · Go Syfert
Search
People v. Nesci, 178 Misc. 2d 685 (N.Y. App. Term. 1998). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
No syfertize treatment data for this case.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
The People of the State of New York
v.
Vincent P. Nesci, Jr.
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York.
Jul 7, 1998.
Published opinion
178 Misc. 2d 685
1998 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 600
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL, Dennis C. Vacco, Attorney-General, New York City (Michael S. Belohlavek and Katharine Demgen of counsel), for appellant. Nesci, Keane, Pierkarski, Keogh & Corrigan, White Plains ('Vincent P. Nesci of counsel), for respondent.
Published

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

Appeal unanimously dismissed.

[*686] An order determining a motion to quash a subpoena issued in the course of the prosecution of a criminal action arises out of a criminal proceeding for which no direct appellate review is authorized (People v Santos, 64 NY2d 702). This rule, however, applies only to the parties to the underlying criminal action. A nonparty to the action may take an appeal since the order is final as to that individual or entity (see, Matter of Grand Jury Subpoena No. 2573/85, 111 AD2d 891, lv denied 65 NY2d 606; People v Johnson, 103 AD2d 754).

In the case at bar, the appellant is the New York State Police, an agency of the Executive Department of the State (Executive Law § 210). Where a State agency is a party to an action, it is the State which is the real party in interest (Matter of Hongisto v Mercure, 72 AD2d 850; 21 Carmody-Wait 2d, NY Prac § 126:111, at 595). Thus, in view of the State Police Division’s relationship to the State of New York, appellant is a party to the criminal proceeding and no appeal may be taken from the instant order denying the motion to quash the subpoena (People v Rivera, NYLJ, May 28, 1987, at 12, col 6 [App Term, 9th & 10th Jud Dists]).

DiPaola, P. J., Ingrassia and Levitt, JJ., concur.