City of Buffalo v. Beck

Decision Date28 April 1954
Citation205 Misc. 757
CourtNew York Supreme Court
PartiesCity of Buffalo, Respondent,<BR>v.<BR>Robert W. Beck, Appellant.

John M. McKee for appellant.

William B. Lawless, Jr., Corporation Counsel (Aaron Weinstein of counsel), for respondent.

WARD, J.

Appellant appeals from a conviction in the Buffalo City Court, City Court Justice ARTHUR J. COSGROVE presiding without a jury. The defendant therein was convicted of a violation of the city ordinances regulating speed of motor vehicles.

Among the errors specified in the affidavit attached to the notice of appeal is, "It was error on the part of the trial court to take judicial notice of the operation and accuracy of radar devices to establish the speed of the defendant's automobile, said device not being a practical application of scientific facts that are generally known or ought to be known."

Upon the trial, the evidence as to the speed of the defendant consisted of (1) testimony of police officers as determined by visual observation of the defendant's car while in motion; (2) record of speed as measured by an electrical recording device, commonly called "radar". The testimony of the police officers as to their observations was competent and properly received by the court. If credible, it was sufficient standing alone to convict.

The taking of judicial notice complained of by the appellant was not proper and the court below erred in so doing. The court failed to consider well-recognized rules which permit a trier of the facts to take judicial notice of what otherwise would require proof. The essence of judicial notice is that the trier of the facts, whether he be judge or juror, will assume as true for the purpose of the case before him, certain facts without requiring proof thereof (People v. French Bottling Works, 259 N.Y. 4, 7). The fundamental justification for this legal phenomenon is that the trier of the facts possesses in common with the public knowledge of facts of common occurrence and notoriety.

In People v. Gitlow (234 N.Y. 132, 143), the court said: "What the world generally knows a court of justice may be assumed to know." Generally speaking, judicial notice may be taken of any fact which is of common notoriety (People v. Snyder, 41 N.Y. 397, 398; also People v. Gitlow, supra). The contrary of this is not so, however. A judge or juror cannot, in the name of judicial notice, substitute his own personal knowledge for evidence. There is a real distinction between a judge's personal knowledge as a private person or knowledge acquired by him as a judge upon another trial and his knowledge as a judge. As a judge he should ignore what he knows as an individual or knowledge which has come to him upon another trial in which evidence was given to bring about that knowledge (Matter of Bommer, 159 Misc. 511). Of course, no fixed rule can be laid down declaring what will be judicially noticed. In a general way courts will notice without evidence, all facts that are part of the general knowledge of the country.

In Town of North Hempstead v. Gregory (53 App. Div. 350, 354) the court said: "whether such a fact be `notorious' obviously depends upon the particular view, the judicial knowledge or the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
20 cases
  • State v. Graham
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • February 13, 1959
    ...Mo.L.Rev. 196 (1959).Contra: People of City of Rochester v. Torpey, 1953, 204 Misc. 1023, 128 N.Y.S.2d 864; People of City of Buffalo v. Beck, 1954, 205 Misc. 757, 130 N.Y.S.2d 354; People v. Offermann, 204 Misc. 769, 125 N.Y.S.2d 179.17 Refer to cases marked 'A' in note 16.18 If this expla......
  • Crews v. Herbert
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of New York
    • November 18, 2008
    ...notice of the existence of the sign and its conformity with statute in all respects) (citing People of City of Buffalo v. Beck, 205 Misc. 757, 758-759, 130 N.Y.S.2d 354 (N.Y.Sup.Ct.1954) ("The essence of judicial notice is that the trier of the facts, whether he be judge or juror, will assu......
  • State v. Dantonio
    • United States
    • New Jersey Supreme Court
    • June 20, 1955
    ...522, 129 N.Y.S.2d 8 (Sp.Sess.1954); People v. Sarver, 205 Misc. 523, 129 N.Y.S.2d 9 (Sp.Sess.1954); People of City of Buffalo v. Beck, 205 Misc. 757, 130 N.Y.S.2d 354 (Sup.Ct.1954); Baer, Radar Goes to Court, 33 N.C.L.Rev. 355, (1955); Woodbridge, Radar in the Courts, 40 Va.L.Rev. 809 (1955......
  • People on Complaint of Igoe v. Nasella
    • United States
    • New York Magistrate Court
    • August 31, 1956
    ...True, there is a decision in the lower New York courts that such judicial notice is not as yet timely. People of City of Buffalo v. Beck, 205 Misc. 757, 130 N.Y.S.2d 354. With due deference to that court's view, I can assign no good reason for not accepting now what must be accepted later. ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT