People v. Evans
| Decision Date | 30 April 1974 |
| Citation | 79 Misc.2d 130,362 N.Y.S.2d 440 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Robert EVANS, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court |
Moskoff & Becker, New City, for appellant.
Robert E. Meehan, Dist. Atty. (Thomas E. Urell, New City, of counsel), for respondent.
Before HOGAN, P.J., and FARLEY and GAGLIARDI, JJ.
Order and Judgment of conviction affirmed. No opinion.
All concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
3 cases
- People v. D'Arcy
-
People v. Van Tuyl
... ... Kenda, 3 A.D.2d 80, 157 N.Y.S.2d 841). Violation of subdivisions 2 and 3 of section 1192 constitutes separate offenses (People v. Rudd, 41 A.D.2d 875, 343 N.Y.S.2d 17; People v. Meikrantz, 77 Misc.2d 892, 351 N.Y.S.2d 549; People v. Evans, 75 Misc.2d 726, 348 N.Y.S.2d 826, affd. by App.Term, 2d Dept., 79 Misc.2d 130, 362 N.Y.S.2d 440). However, no reported decision in this state holds that a conviction under section 1192(1) may include impairment solely by reason of the intake of drugs ... It must be emphasized ... ...
-
People v. Davis
...514 N.E.2d 1383; People v. McDonough, 39 A.D.2d 188, 333 N.Y.S.2d 128; People v. Evans, 75 Misc.2d 726, 348 N.Y.S.2d 826, affd. 79 Misc.2d 130, 362 N.Y.S.2d 440 [Vehicle & Traffic Law § 1192, subdivisions 2 and 3]. There is no reason for a different rule in the case of multiple non-inclusor......