People v. Bomboy
| Decision Date | 09 March 1962 |
| Citation | 32 Misc.2d 1002,229 N.Y.S.2d 323 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York v. Warren J. BOMBOY. The PEOPLE of the State of New York v. Peter BOMBOY, Jr. |
| Court | New York Court of Special Sessions |
John T. Garry, Dist. Atty. of Albany County (Robert P. Luddy, Asst. Dist. Atty., of counsel), for the People.
Eugene G. Hess, Albany, for defendants.
Defendants are charged with a breach of the peace in violation of Section 43 of the Penal Law. Defendant Peter Bomboy, Jr. is also charged with assault in the third degree in violation of Section 244(1) of the Penal Law.
On July 3, 1961, at approximately 3:55 A. M. the defendants were seen entering a fenced-in area behind a large building housing Bomboy's Garage. The arresting officers, two State Troopers, drove their car onto the property, behind the building and ascertained that the enclosed area was a swimming pool. The officers asked the defendants several times to identify themselves and they refused. The defendants were thereupon advised that they were under arrest for disorderly conduct for refusing to answer the officers' inquiries. Thereafter the defendants engaged in some loud conversation with the arresting officers and used vile and obscene language in refusing to identify themselves and in ordering the officers to remove themselves from the property. The defendants were handcuffed together and at that time defendant Peter Bomboy, Jr ., while handcuffed, struck one of the arresting officers on the nose with his fist. Defendants were then brought before this Justice and informations were filed charging them with violations of the sections hereinbefore mentioned. Defendants were not charged with the offense of disorderly conduct, although they had been advised they were under arrest for committing the same.
The basis for the arrests under Section 43 of the Penal Law was that defendants refused to identify themselves when requested to by the arresting officers and thereafter engaged in obscene language. The arrests were made on real property owned by defendant Peter Bomboy, Jr. At that time, the officers did not have warrants for arrest of defendants nor at the time of the inquiry as to defendants' identity had a crime been committed in the presence of the officers. The law appears clear that the failure to identify one's self to a police officer is not a crime. People v. Tinston, 6 Misc.2d 485, 163 N.Y.S.2d 554. The Constitution of the United States protects the rights of the people to be secure in their person. Amendment IV, United States Constitution. The arrest for disorderly conduct was illegal. The loud and obscene language which occurred after defendants were advised of their arrest, which arrest was illegal, did not provoke a breach of the public peace. People v . Tinston, supra.
If defendants...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Briggs
...v. Dreares, supra, 15 A.D.2d at 206-207, 221 N.Y.S.2d at 821-822; People v. Daniels, supra; People v. Dority, supra; People v. Bomboy, 32 Misc.2d 1002, 229 N.Y.S.2d 323; People v. La Sister, 9 Misc.2d 518, 170 N.Y.S.2d 702; see also, People v. Hamilton, supra, where a felony was suspected).......