People v. Y. O. 1185
| Decision Date | 24 June 1971 |
| Citation | 66 Misc.2d 734,322 N.Y.S.2d 573 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Plaintiff, v. Y.O. 1185, Defendant. |
| Court | New York District Court |
William Cahn, Dist. Atty., Nassau County, by Robert Auld, Asst. Dist. Atty., for plaintiff.
Joseph J. Filardi, Kew Gardens, for defendant.
This motion poses the question: Is an information filed after summary arrest for a violation of section 1192--2 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law sufficient on its face, if it is in the form prescribed by section 147--e of the Code of Criminal Procedure, or, to state it conversely, is such an information insufficient because it fails to meet the tests provided by the Court of Appeals in People v. Jeffries, 19 N.Y.2d 564, 281 N.Y.S.2d 67, 227 N.E.2d 870 and People v. James, 4 N.Y.2d 482, 176 N.Y.S.2d 323, 151 N.E.2d 877.
A resolution of this problem involves a close consideration of the language of section 147--e of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the decisions of the Court of Appeals in People v. Boback, 23 N.Y.2d 189, 295 N.Y.S.2d 912, 243 N.E.2d 135 and People v. Scott, 3 N.Y.2d 148, 164 N.Y.S.2d 707, 143 N.E.2d 901. The Code provides 'a simplified traffic information shall be signed by a peace officer, and may be substantially in the following from, or in a form prescribed by the commissioner of motor vehicles * * *.'
Literally the section may be construed as providing for two permissible forms, the first in the language prescribed by the statute and the second, the form prescribed by the Commissioner.
In People v. Scott, Supra, the court considered the adequacy of a uniform traffic ticket prescribed by the Bureau of Motor Vehicles pursuant to section 74 (now section 207) of the Vehicle and Traffic Law. The court pointed out that no uniform Complaint had been prescribed at that time. By a divided court, it was held that jurisdiction wa snot acquired even though a defendant appeared personally and pleaded guilty to a violation of driving while intoxicated on a uniform traffic ticket. The dissent noted that, at common law, a misdemeanor information was not required to be sworn. The majority opinion emphasized the necessity of requiring a verified information.
In People v. Boback, Supra, the court considered the constitutionality of the procedure where the simplified traffic information was used in combination with the uniform traffic ticket. in Boback, the court held that the requirement of facts under oath in an information as prescribed in Jeffries and James was not a constitutional requirement. The court stated '...
To continue reading
Request your trial