In re Armell N.

CourtNew York Family Court
Writing for the CourtLEE HAND ELKINS
Citation905 N.Y.S.2d 471,28 Misc.3d 528
Decision Date24 May 2010
PartiesIn the Matter of ARMELL N., A Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent, Respondent.
905 N.Y.S.2d 471
28 Misc.3d 528


In the Matter of ARMELL N., A Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent, Respondent.

Family Court, Kings County, New York.

May 24, 2010.

905 N.Y.S.2d 472

Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel (Carrie Eicholtz of counsel), for presentment agency.

Legal Aid Society (Todd Smith of counsel), for respondent.

LEE HAND ELKINS, J.

28 Misc.3d 529

This matter is before the court for decision following fact finding. The respondent is charged with Obstructing Governmental Administration (Penal Law § 195.05), Resisting Arrest (Penal Law § 205.30) and Menacing in the third degree (Penal Law § 120.15)

Evidence at fact finding established that on June 11, 2009, at about 11 a.m. New York City Transit Police officers Santi and Cruz evicted the fifteen year old respondent Armell N. first from the A train, and then from the transit system. The officers testified that as they entered the A train at the Borough Hall subway station, they observed the respondent and another young man with their feet on the seat, occupying more than one seat in violation of transit authority rules. Officer Cruz testified that he told the respondent twice to put his feet down. The respondent "stomped and cursed," but complied with the order. Officer Santi testified that a few stops later, the respondent was staring at the officers and they "looked back at him." The respondent said to the officers: "What the f--- are you looking at?" Officer Cruz testified that he asked the respondent "what was (his) problem," and asked the respondent in turn what he was looking at. The officers conferred and decided that at the next stop they would remove the respondent from the train. According to officer Cruz, he was to be removed "for being disorderly and disrespectful." According to officer Santi, the respondent was being removed "because he was creating a public alarm and scaring the other passengers." The train stopped at the Euclid Avenue station in Brooklyn.

905 N.Y.S.2d 473
Officer Santi approached
28 Misc.3d 530
the respondent as officer Cruz held the train doors. Officer Santi told the respondent three times to "get off the train." The respondent did not leave the train. The respondent declared that he was not getting off of the train and to the officers to "go f---." Officer Cruz then informed the respondent that if he did not get off of the train, the police officers "were going to forcibly remove him." Officer Cruz held the train door with his leg, while officer Santi grabbed the respondent's forearm and forcibly escorted the respondent from the train. Officer Cruz told the respondent that he was being removed from the train "for being disorderly, occupying more than one seat, and people seemed alarmed." After being removed from the train the respondent was "irate," "still cursing and flailing his arms, being disorderly." Officers Cruz and Santi then decided to eject the respondent from the transit system. They informed the respondent that he was being ejected. Officer Santi grabbed one forearm as officer Cruz grabbed the other forearm, and they escorted the respondent out of the subway station through the exit gate. Officer Santi testified that he informed the respondent that if he came back into the transit system, he would "be arrested for trespass." When the respondent arrived on the mezzanine, outside of the station entrance, he took his Metrocard out of his pocket and re-entered the station through the turnstile. Officer Santi testified that as he re-entered the respondent came running in, charging toward the officer, arms swinging "like out of rage." Officer Cruz testified that as he re-entered, the respondent "flailed his arms and hit officer Santi on the right side of the forehead." Officer Santi did not recall being hit. Both officer Santi and the respondent fell to the station floor. Officer Cruz got behind the respondent and tried to handcuff him for "not following a lawful order," and "not allowing us to perform our duties as NYC police officers." The respondent kept his arms under his chest to avoid being handcuffed. Ultimately, the officers were able to place handcuffs on the respondent.

The Presentment Agency variously argues that the respondent obstructed governmental administration when he refused to leave the train, and when he ran back into the station flailing his arms. The Presentment Agency argues that the respondent was subject to eviction from the train because he had his feet on the seat, and because he cursed at the police officers. According to the Presentment Agency, the former is specifically prohibited by Transit Authority regulations. As for cursing at the officers,

28 Misc.3d 531
the Presentment Agency asserts that the regulations are "not exhaustive, but merely illustrative." The Presentment Agency asserts that "it is implausible to create guidelines which anticipate every single scenario in which an individual police officer is authorized to eject someone from the system." In any event, the Presentment Agency argues, the respondent "created a dangerous situation for the other passengers riding the train and created public alarm when he began cursing at (the) officers." The Presentment Agency argues further that "once on the platform the respondent impeded the safe flow of traffic when he continued to curse at police and began flailing his arms at police while refusing to leave the station." Eventually, the petitioner argues, he resisted arrest for obstructing governmental administration when he lay on his arms and refused to be handcuffed. The petitioner also argues that the respondent intentionally placed officer Santi in fear of physical injury when he ran toward him flailing his arms, upon reentering the station.
905 N.Y.S.2d 474

The elements of Obstructing Governmental Administration are preventing or attempting to prevent a public servant from performing an...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 practice notes
  • Mediavilla v. City of N.Y., 14–CV–8624 (VSB)
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. Southern District of New York
    • September 29, 2016
    ...function." Dowling v. City of New York , No. 11-CV-4954, 2013 WL 5502867, at *4 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 30, 2013) (quoting In re Armell N ., 28 Misc.3d 528, 531, 905 N.Y.S.2d 471 (N.Y. Fam. Ct. 2010) ). I will treat these intent requirements as overlapping. Akinnagbe , 128 F.Supp.3d at 546. Here, t......
  • People v. Estrada, No. 2013–1929ORCR.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Term
    • January 8, 2016
    ...2014] ; People v. Hopkins, 12 Misc.3d 130[A], 2006 N.Y. Slip Op 51041[U] [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2006] ; Matter of Arnell N., 28 Misc.3d 528, 531–532, 905 N.Y.S.2d 471 [Family Ct, Kings County 2010] ).In fulfilling its responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of ......
  • Duncan v. City of N.Y., 11-CV-3901 (ENV)(JO)
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of New York)
    • July 17, 2017
    ...in a specific official function, Akinnagbe v. City of New York, 128 F. Supp. 3d 539, 545-46 (E.D.N.Y. 2015). See also In re Armell N., 28 Misc. 3d 528, 531, 905 N.Y.S.2d 471, 474 (Fam. Ct., Kings Cnty. 2010) (collecting cases). "Physical force or (physical) interference can consist of inapp......
  • Dowling v. City of N.Y., 11-CV-4954 (NGG) (RML)
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of New York)
    • September 30, 2013
    ...administration to involve intent "to prevent the public servant from engaging in a specific official function." In re Armell N., 28 Misc. 3d 528, 531 (N.Y. Fam. Ct. 2010) (citation omitted). In this case, Officer Gasquez wouldPage 8have had to have probable cause to believe that Plaintiff w......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
7 cases
  • Mediavilla v. City of N.Y., 14–CV–8624 (VSB)
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. Southern District of New York
    • September 29, 2016
    ...function." Dowling v. City of New York , No. 11-CV-4954, 2013 WL 5502867, at *4 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 30, 2013) (quoting In re Armell N ., 28 Misc.3d 528, 531, 905 N.Y.S.2d 471 (N.Y. Fam. Ct. 2010) ). I will treat these intent requirements as overlapping. Akinnagbe , 128 F.Supp.3d at 546. Here, t......
  • People v. Estrada, No. 2013–1929ORCR.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Term
    • January 8, 2016
    ...2014] ; People v. Hopkins, 12 Misc.3d 130[A], 2006 N.Y. Slip Op 51041[U] [App Term, 2d & 11th Jud Dists 2006] ; Matter of Arnell N., 28 Misc.3d 528, 531–532, 905 N.Y.S.2d 471 [Family Ct, Kings County 2010] ).In fulfilling its responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of ......
  • Duncan v. City of N.Y., 11-CV-3901 (ENV)(JO)
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of New York)
    • July 17, 2017
    ...in a specific official function, Akinnagbe v. City of New York, 128 F. Supp. 3d 539, 545-46 (E.D.N.Y. 2015). See also In re Armell N., 28 Misc. 3d 528, 531, 905 N.Y.S.2d 471, 474 (Fam. Ct., Kings Cnty. 2010) (collecting cases). "Physical force or (physical) interference can consist of inapp......
  • Dowling v. City of N.Y., 11-CV-4954 (NGG) (RML)
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 2nd Circuit. United States District Court (Eastern District of New York)
    • September 30, 2013
    ...administration to involve intent "to prevent the public servant from engaging in a specific official function." In re Armell N., 28 Misc. 3d 528, 531 (N.Y. Fam. Ct. 2010) (citation omitted). In this case, Officer Gasquez wouldPage 8have had to have probable cause to believe that Plaintiff w......
  • 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