People v. Conte
| Decision Date | 03 July 1969 |
| Citation | 64 Misc.2d 573,315 N.Y.S.2d 348 |
| Parties | PEOPLE of the State of New York, Plaintiff, v. Peter CONTE, Defendant. |
| Court | New York District Court |
Defendant is charged with violations of Chapter 7, Section 705, subsection 12.6 of the Public Assembly Ordinance of the Town of Babylon. The informations allege that the defendant, 'did, at the Great 110, Inc., * * * as owner, operator, agent, lessee or person in control of a place of public assembly permit a female person, who comes in contact or is likely to come in contact with patrons of said business establishment, to appear in the presence of such patrons with her breasts uncovered, and did permit such female to appear in a sketch, scene or act, with her breasts uncovered in the presence of patrons of said establishment.'
It is the defendant's contention that the Ordinance under which he is charged is void in that it is beyond the power of the Town of Babylon to enact, and that as a result the action against him should be dismissed. Defendant further contends that subsection 12.6 of the said Ordinance is unconstitutional 'because it is void for vagueness of language and does not denote with any degree of specificity the nature of the offense or when it has been committed.'
In opposition, the People submit that the Ordinance in question is a valid exercise of the power of the Town of Babylon to license and regulate places of public assembly.
Article 9 Section 2 of the Constitution of the State of New York provides in subsection (c) that 'In addition to powers granted in the statute of local governments or in any other law * * * (ii) every local government shall have power to adopt and amend local laws not inconsistent with the provisions of this constitution or any general law relating to the following subjects, whether or not they relate to the property, affairs or government of such local government: * * * (10) * * * protection, order, conduct, safety, health and well-being of persons or property therein.'
As stated in Wholesale Laundry Board of Trade, Inc. v. City of New York, 43 Misc.2d 816, 819, 252 N.Y.S.2d 502, 506, (Emphasis in original)
For the sake of clarity the relevant sections of the New York Penal Code and the Ordinances of the Town of Babylon will be reproduced below.
Penal Code Section 245.01 reads as follows:
Babylon Town Ordinance Chapter VII, Section 705, subsection 12.6 reads as follows:
'No person operating a place of public assembly, although not required to be licensed under this local law, shall permit any waitress, barmaid or any other person who comes in contact, or is likely to come in contact with the patrons of such place of public assembly to appear in the presence of such patrons with breasts or the lower part of the torso uncovered, or so thinly covered or draped as to appear uncovered; or shall permit any person to appear in any scene, sketch or act with breasts or the lower part of the torso uncovered, or so thinly covered or draped as to appear uncovered.'
Defendant contends that since the New York Penal Law specifically exempts from coverage '* * * any female entertaining or performing in a play, exhibition, show or entertainment' (Section 245.01), and also exempts the promoter '* * * where such female is entertaining or performing in a play, exhibition, show or entertainment' (245.02), Section 705, subsection 12.6 of the Babylon Town Ordinances is not consistent with a general law of the State of New York and is therefore void.
The term 'general law' is defined by the New York Constitution as a 'law which in terms and in effect applies alike to all counties, all counties other than those wholly included within a city, all cities, all towns or all villages.' (N.Y.Const. Art. IX, Section 3 subd. (d), par. (1))
There can be little doubt that Article 245 of the New York Penal Code is such a general law as was contemplated by the definition quoted above. Nothing in the statute in any way qualifies its coverage; it relates to a matter of state concern and applies to all localities. As such, should Section 705, Subsection 12.6 of the Babylon Town Ordinance prove to be inconsistent with the Penal Law, it must be found to be an unwarranted usurpation of State Legislative power.
The People rely principally upon the case of People v. Lewis, 295 N.Y. 42, 64 N.E.2d 702. It is their contention that this case stands for the proposition that the 'mere fact that the State may have legislated covering a part of an area of the law and excepts part from coverage, does not give rise to State preemption in the area so excepted.'
A close reading of the Lewis case, supra, however, reveals that therein, 'the only suggestions of inconsistency are predicated upon the imposition of penalties, for violation of the Price Administrator's regulations, in excess of those imposed by the New York State War Emergency Act, * * *'. The court continued stating that the ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Penny Lane/East Hampton, Inc. v. County of Suffolk
...then there would be no restriction on municipal regulation of prostitution or even robbery, arson, or murder (see, People v. Conte, 64 Misc.2d 573, 315 N.Y.S.2d 348 [section does not permit town's regulation of topless dancing; specific authority later granted by legislation]. Further, it h......
-
People v. Karns
...constitutionality continues to exist until such time as it is attacked and overruled by the proper tribunal(s) (People v. Conte, 64 Misc.2d 573, 315 N.Y.S.2d 348 (1969)). Since the ordinance now before the court was never attacked prior to the passage of the enabling act of 1970, even thoug......
-
Kim v. Town of Orangetown
...or all villages.' The Penal Law has been declared to be a general law within the meaning of the Constitution (People v. Conte, 64 Misc.2d 573, 575--576, 315 N.Y.S.2d 348, 351; Town of Babylon v. Conte, 61 Misc.2d 1055, 307 N.Y.S.2d 735; People v. Del Gardo, 1 Misc.2d 821, 827, 146 N.Y.S.2d ......
-
People v. Wilkerson
...State and it has been specifically so held and applied (Town of Babylon v. Conte, 61 Misc.2d 1055, 307 N.Y.S.2d 735; People v. Conte, 64 Misc.2d 573, 315 N.Y.S.2d 348; People v. Del Gardo, Supra; People v. Kearse, Supra). It is also well settled law that where a local law is inconsistent or......