Hoffman v. Melton

CourtNew York Supreme Court Appellate Division
Citation439 N.Y.S.2d 449,81 A.D.2d 709
Decision Date23 April 1981
PartiesIn the Matter of Gary W. HOFFMAN, Petitioner, v. James P. MELTON, as Commissioner of the Department of Motor Vehicles, Respondent.

Page 449

439 N.Y.S.2d 449
81 A.D.2d 709
In the Matter of Gary W. HOFFMAN, Petitioner,
v.
James P. MELTON, as Commissioner of the Department of Motor
Vehicles, Respondent.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division,
Third Department.
April 23, 1981.

Page 450

Robert A. Becher, Troy, for petitioner; Joseph B. Rafter, Troy, of counsel.

Robert Abrams, Atty. Gen. (Joseph J. Micare, Asst. Atty. Gen., of counsel), for respondent.

Before MAHONEY, P.J., and SWEENEY, KANE, CASEY and WEISS, JJ.

MEMORANDUM DECISION.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this court by order of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered in Rensselaer County) to review a determination of the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles which revoked petitioner's driver's license.

On March 28, 1979, petitioner was arrested for driving while intoxicated and taken to State Police barracks. He was then asked to submit to a chemical test and advised that if he refused to submit to the test his driver's license could be revoked. He was also informed that the fact that he refused could be used against him in any trial or proceeding resulting from the arrest. The arresting officer testified at the hearing, without objection by petitioner, that petitioner had refused to submit to the chemical test. This officer also testified that he did not read any Miranda warnings to petitioner prior to his refusal to submit to the test. Petitioner's driver's license was revoked and this proceeding was commenced to annul respondent's determination.

The sole contention of petitioner in this proceeding is that the failure to advise him of his Miranda rights at the time of his arrest rendered testimony as to his refusal to submit to the chemical test inadmissible at the hearing and the determination must, therefore, be annulled. No objection to this testimony was made at the hearing and, as a general rule, the issue as to the admissibility of the evidence would not now be reviewed by this court for the first time in this proceeding (see Matter of Gonzalez v. State Liq. Auth., 30 N.Y.2d 108, 331 N.Y.S.2d 6, 282 N.E.2d 101; Matter of Malkin v. Tully, 65 A.D.2d 228, 412 N.Y.S.2d 186). In any event, we find no error in the admission of the evidence in question.

The Miranda warnings are procedural safeguards designed to protect an individual's privilege against self incrimination (Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 478, 479, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 1629, 1630, 16 L.Ed.2d 694). In Schmerber v. California, 384...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 practice notes
  • People v. Rosario
    • United States
    • New York City Court
    • 30 Julio 1987
    ...179, 180-1, 402 N.Y.S.2d 735 (Webster Town Ct., Monroe Cty.1978). See also Matter of Hoffman v. Melton, 81 A.D.2d Page 911 709, 710, 439 N.Y.S.2d 449 (3d Dept.1981). Since the state may properly require a person suspected of driving while intoxicated to submit to chemical testing without in......
  • People v. Shaw
    • United States
    • New York Villiage Court
    • 28 Diciembre 1984
    ...of his Miranda rights does not preclude the admission into evidence of his refusal to take a chemical test." Hoffman v. Melton, 81 A.D.2d 709, 710, 439 N.Y.S.2d 449. Finally it, "is well established that express consent for withdrawal of a motor vehicle operator's blood is not constitutiona......
  • People v. Sanchez
    • United States
    • New York City Court
    • 6 Febrero 1987
    ...a person of his Miranda rights does not preclude the admission into evidence of his refusal to take a chemical test (Hoffman v. Melton, 81 A.D.2d 709, 439 N.Y.S.2d 449 People v. Haitz, 65 A.D.2d 172, 411 N.Y.S.2d 57 The physical coordination tests did not require the disclosure of defendant......
3 cases
  • People v. Rosario
    • United States
    • New York City Court
    • 30 Julio 1987
    ...179, 180-1, 402 N.Y.S.2d 735 (Webster Town Ct., Monroe Cty.1978). See also Matter of Hoffman v. Melton, 81 A.D.2d Page 911 709, 710, 439 N.Y.S.2d 449 (3d Dept.1981). Since the state may properly require a person suspected of driving while intoxicated to submit to chemical testing without in......
  • People v. Shaw
    • United States
    • New York Villiage Court
    • 28 Diciembre 1984
    ...of his Miranda rights does not preclude the admission into evidence of his refusal to take a chemical test." Hoffman v. Melton, 81 A.D.2d 709, 710, 439 N.Y.S.2d 449. Finally it, "is well established that express consent for withdrawal of a motor vehicle operator's blood is not constitutiona......
  • People v. Sanchez
    • United States
    • New York City Court
    • 6 Febrero 1987
    ...a person of his Miranda rights does not preclude the admission into evidence of his refusal to take a chemical test (Hoffman v. Melton, 81 A.D.2d 709, 439 N.Y.S.2d 449 People v. Haitz, 65 A.D.2d 172, 411 N.Y.S.2d 57 The physical coordination tests did not require the disclosure of defendant......

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