People v. Curran
| Decision Date | 28 October 1982 |
| Citation | 90 A.D.2d 661,456 N.Y.S.2d 281 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Arlene F. CURRAN, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Joseph F. Kehoe, Oneonta, for appellant.
Colin E. Ingham, Oneonta (Albert E. Clune, Unadilla, of counsel), for respondent.
Before MAHONEY, P.J., and SWEENEY, MAIN, MIKOLL and YESAWICH, JJ.
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Otsego County, rendered February 17, 1982, convicting defendant upon her plea of guilty of two counts of the crime of criminally negligent homicide.
Defendant was operating her car on a snowy evening in December of 1980 when it crossed over the center line and collided head-on with another car containing six persons. Two of the passengers in the other car were killed while the driver and the remaining three passengers sustained various injuries. Defendant, a 37-year-old woman, also suffered serious injuries which rendered her unconscious following the accident and ultimately required an extended period of hospitalization. A blood test taken shortly after the accident from defendant while she lay unconscious in the hospital revealed that defendant's blood contained .23 of one per centum by weight of alcohol.
This accident resulted in defendant being indicted on two counts of manslaughter in the second degree (Penal Law, § 125.15) and one count of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol (Vehicle and Traffic Law, § 1192, subd. 2). Following the denial by the trial court of defendant's motion to suppress the results of the blood test, defendant pleaded guilty to two counts of criminally negligent homicide in full satisfaction of the indictment. She received concurrent one-to-three-year sentences of imprisonment on each count. This appeal by defendant ensued wherein she argues that the trial court (1) incorrectly denied her suppression motion, and (2) imposed a harsh and excessive sentence.
We need not reach defendant's contentions regarding her sentence since it is our view that the judgment of conviction must be reversed. The trial court found that a State trooper, after talking with the driver of the other vehicle involved in the accident and after smelling alcohol emitting from defendant while she was in the hospital, arrested defendant prior to authorizing hospital personnel to perform the blood alcohol test. The trial court then relied on the statutory presumption wherein drivers operating vehicles within the State are deemed to have consented to blood tests (Vehicle and Traffic Law, § 1194, subd. 1) as the basis for denying defendant's motion to suppress the test results, notwithstanding that defendant was unconscious and therefore could not refuse to submit to the test (see Vehicle and Traffic Law, § 1194, subd. 2).
Contrary to defendant's position on this appeal, the trial court correctly assumed that an unconscious person can be placed under arrest (People v. McGroder, 81 Misc.2d 1081, 367 N.Y.S.2d 714; cf. People v. Kates, 53 N.Y.2d 591, 444 N.Y.S.2d 446, 428 N.E.2d 852). Once a driver of a motor vehicle is arrested, the authorization for administration of chemical blood tests under the provisions of section...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Wade
...N.E.2d 1235 (1982) aff'g. 83 A.D.2d 187, 444 N.Y.S.2d 331, 84 A.D.2d 916, 446 N.Y.S.2d 658 (4th Dept., 1981); People v. Curran, 90 A.D.2d 661, 456 N.Y.S.2d 281 (3rd Dept., 1982); People v. Hall, App.Div. 457 N.Y.S.2d 580 (2nd Dept., 1983) From a reading of these cases, one is first impresse......
-
People v. Dixon
...obtained and the nature of the offenses charged (see, People v. Wade, 118 Misc.2d 330, 340, 460 N.Y.S.2d 870; see also, People v. Curran, 90 A.D.2d 661, 456 N.Y.S.2d 281; 2 Callaghan, Criminal Procedure in New York, § 7.12). We have previously construed the Moselle holding to the contrary i......
-
People v. Mule
...v. Moselle, 57 N.Y.2d 97, 454 N.Y.S.2d 292, 439 N.E.2d 1235; People v. Magiera, 97 A.D.2d 963, 468 N.Y.S.2d 767; People v. Curran, 90 A.D.2d 661, 456 N.Y.S.2d 281). Consent, in this context, be taken to mean, that the defendant's assent was not the product of duress or coercion, express or ......
-
Obrist v. Commissioner of Motor Vehicles
...evidence before the policeman at the time of the arrest that there are reasonable grounds for making the arrest. See People v. Curran, 90 A.D.2d 661, 456 N.Y.S.2d 281; People v. Daniel, 84 A.D.2d 916, 446 N.Y.S.2d 658, aff'd. 57 N.Y.2d 97, 454 N.Y.S.2d 292, 439 N.E.2d 1235, Kowanes v. Depar......