People v. Greer

Decision Date02 July 2001
Citation189 Misc.2d 310,731 N.Y.S.2d 323
CourtNew York Supreme Court
PartiesTHE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent,<BR>v.<BR>SIDNEY GEORGE GREER, Appellant.

Thomas P. Halley, Poughkeepsie, and Rizzo & Kelley, Poughkeepsie (James P. Kelley of counsel), for appellant.

William V. Grady, District Attorney of Dutchess County, Poughkeepsie (Jessica Z. Segal of counsel), for respondent.

FLOYD, P. J., COLABELLA and COPPOLA, JJ., concur.

OPINION OF THE COURT
MEMORANDUM.

Judgment of conviction unanimously modified upon the law by reinstating the jury verdict finding defendant guilty of driving while impaired as a traffic infraction, vacating the sentence imposed, remitting the fine, if paid, and remanding for resentence, and as so modified, affirmed.

Although originally charged with driving while intoxicated as a misdemeanor (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192 [2], [3]), defendant was found guilty by a jury of driving while impaired as a lesser included offense (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192 [1]). At the instance of the People, the court below conducted a CPL 400.40 hearing before sentencing and found that defendant had two prior convictions for driving while impaired within the previous 10 years. The justice's return reveals that the court, on the basis of its interpretations of CPL 400.40 and Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1193, "elevated the charge to a misdemeanor and sentenced accordingly."

The court below erred in concluding that it could utilize the procedure prescribed by CPL 400.40 to enhance the grade of offense from traffic infraction to misdemeanor (People v Jamison, 170 Misc 2d 974). CPL 400.40 reads in part:

"Procedure for determining prior convictions for the purpose of sentence in certain cases
"1. Applicability. Where a conviction is entered for * * * a traffic infraction and the authorized sentence depends upon whether the defendant has a previous judgment of conviction for an offense * * * such issue is determined as provided in this section.
"2. Statement to be filed. If it appears that the defendant has a previous judgment of conviction and if the court is required, or in its discretion desires, to impose a sentence that would not be authorized in the absence of such previous judgment, a statement must be filed after conviction and before sentence setting forth the date and place of the previous judgment or judgments and the court must conduct a hearing to determine whether the defendant is the same person mentioned in the record of such judgment or judgments. In any case where an increased sentence is mandatory, the statement may be filed by the court or by the prosecutor. In any case where an increased sentence is discretionary, the statement may be filed only by the court."

As above stated, CPL 400.40 provides a "Procedure for determining prior convictions for the purpose of sentence in certain cases" (emphasis added). Said provision does not authorize an...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • People v. Harris
    • United States
    • New York District Court
    • 22 Noviembre 2006
    ...(Rochester City Ct 1996, Pfeiffer, J.). The court also recognizes that its decision is at odds with the holding in People v Greer, 189 Misc 2d 310 (App Term, 2d Dept 2001), which is not binding on this court. See People v Pestana, 195 Misc 2d 833 (Crim Ct, NY County 2003, Jaffe, J.). While ......
  • People v. Harris
    • United States
    • New York District Court
    • 14 Noviembre 2008
    ...infraction to driving while ability impaired as a misdemeanor, based upon the proven existence of prior convictions (see People v Greer, 189 Misc 2d 310 [2001]; People v Jamison, 170 Misc 2d 974 Nor is there any indication that a different result would obtain under CPL 400.40 in cases where......
  • People v. Dorilas
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Term
    • 21 Abril 2008
    ...Driving while ability impaired, as charged here, is a traffic infraction (see Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1193 [1] [a]; see also People v Greer, 189 Misc 2d 310 [App Term, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 2001]), and CPL 30.30 does not apply to traffic infractions (see People v Taylor, 189 Misc 2d 313, 3......
  • People v. Lazzar, 2004 NY Slip Op 24027 (NY 2/2/2004)
    • United States
    • New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • 2 Febrero 2004
    ...§ 1192 (1), within 10 years, result in an automatic misdemeanor conviction? Legal Analysis Defense counsel cites People v. Greer (189 Misc 2d 310 [App Term, 2d Dept 2001]) in support of his claim that the instant DWAI conviction resulted in a traffic infraction conviction. The Appellate Ter......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT