Crime & Safety

State's Highest Court Rules In Favor Of Suffolk Prosecutors Over Dismissed Case: DA

The court sided with the Suffolk County DA's Office in a case involving a reported assault on a police officer, officials say.

SMITHTOWN, NY — The New York Court of Appeals has upheld the reinstatement of criminal charges in People v. Henry Fuentes, siding with the Suffolk County District Attorney's Office after a lower court had dismissed the case over discovery issues, District Attorney Ray Tierney said Thursday.

According to Tierney, the case was originally dismissed by Suffolk County District Court in 2022 after a judge found that prosecutors failed to disclose an Internal Affairs Bureau report that cleared a Suffolk police officer of misconduct. The Appellate Term later reversed the dismissal in 2023, and the state's highest court has now affirmed that decision in a 5 to 2 ruling, the DA said.

The Court of Appeals found that prosecutors met their legal disclosure obligations and that the Internal Affairs report did not contain additional information of evidentiary value, Tierney said.

Find out what's happening in Smithtownfor free with the latest updates from Patch.

The charges stem from a 2021 incident in which Fuentes allegedly became intoxicated, got stuck in a child's swing, and later pushed a responding officer and attempted to take her patrol car keys, and jumped into the driver’s seat, the DA said.

The officer was able to call for backup, who took the defendant into custody, Tierney said.

Find out what's happening in Smithtownfor free with the latest updates from Patch.

During the course of the prosecution, the District Attorney’s Office identified a past federal civil lawsuit against the police officer, the DA said.

She, and multiple other officers, had been sued in connection with a 911 response to "a man with a gun," Tierney said.

It was alleged that, after responding to that scene, the officers illegally searched the plaintiff’s home when securing his weapons, Tierney said.

In connection with constitutional and statutory disclosure obligations, the information regarding the federal lawsuit was disclosed to the defense, for whatever value it might have provided during cross-examination of the police officer, Tierney said.

The defense, upon receiving the information, thereafter waited five months, until the eve of a pre-trial hearing, before making a request for any Internal Affairs Bureau records that might exist in connection with the lawsuit, Tierney said.

The District Attorney’s Office produced an Internal Affairs Bureau report, in connection with that civil suit, that exonerated the police officer from any wrongdoing, the DA said.

Nevertheless, the defense made a motion to dismiss, claiming that the District Attorney’s Office had withheld the information in violation of the defendant’s constitutional and statutory rights, Tierney said.

The presiding judge agreed that the prosecution had failed in its discovery obligations under the state statute and dismissed the case, the DA said.

In 2023, the Appellate Term of the Supreme Court for the Ninth and Tenth Judicial Districts reversed the dismissal and reinstated the charges, but the defendant filed another appeal, to the New York Court of Appeals, and was granted leave, the DA said.

In the 5 to 2 decision, the Court of Appeals agreed with the Suffolk County District Attorney, holding that the DA’s Office provided the necessary information to the defense relating to the incident and rejecting the defense argument that the Internal Affairs records contained additional "impeachment" material beyond what was already disclosed, Tierney said.

The Court noted especially that the state’s discovery statute "inserts consideration of evidentiary value into the disclosure requirement." Having found no such value to the Internal Affairs record, the Court affirmed the reinstatement of charges, allowing the prosecution to move forward in Suffolk County District Court, Tierney said.

"While we are heartened by this meritorious appeal, the near four-year pathway of a misdemeanor prosecution to the highest court in the state over a mind-numbing technical attack just shows how the state's 2020 so-called discovery 'reforms' have tied up valuable prosecution resources," Tierney said. "The fact that prosecutors must engage in clerical advocacy more than legal advocacy is nothing short of a public safety tragedy."

Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.