People v. Sedlock

Summary

The New York Court of Appeals held that the accusatory instrument failed to provide sufficient notice because it alleged a seven-month period for a noncontinuous forcible-touching offense without adequate justification for the lack of greater temporal specificity. The court reversed the order affirming the conviction and dismissed the information.

Holdings

1. The People failed to provide sufficient notice of the charged conduct because the seven-month time frame was unreasonable under the circumstances and was not adequately justified by the People's inability to identify a narrower period.
2. The information should have been dismissed because the People failed to cure its inadequate time allegation in response to the defendant's bill of particulars.

Questions Presented

1. Whether an information alleging a noncontinuous act of forcible touching during a seven-month period provided sufficient notice of the nature and cause of the accusation to allow the defendant to prepare a defense and protect against double jeopardy.
2. Whether the information should have been dismissed because the People failed to provide a more precise time frame in response to the defendant's demand for a bill of particulars.

Disposition

reversed