People v. Hampton
| Decision Date | 15 January 1960 |
| Citation | 22 Misc.2d 432,197 N.Y.S.2d 959 |
| Parties | PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. George HAMPTON, Jr., Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | New York County Court |
Joseph F. Gagliardi, Dist. Atty., White Plains, by George P. Forbes, Sp. Asst. Dist. Atty., Larchmont, for respondent.
Edward F. X. Ryan, Larchmont, for defendant-appellant.
The defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction after a jury trial rendered by the Court of Special Sessions of the Village of Larchmont for a violation of § 70, subd. 5-a of the Vehicle and Traffic Law (). The facts are largely undisputed; the ultimate question is whether the guilt of the defendant was proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
The accident occurred in the early morning hours of New Year's Day, 1959. The defendant in the company of two friends celebrated the coming of the New Year at his home in Larchmont. He had driven one of his friends to the latter's home and was engaged in taking the second to his home when his automobile struck a parked car. No one was seated in the parked car, nor was the owner or a police officer in the vicinity. The defendant stopped his automobile for perhaps half a minute and then proceeded to his friend's home. The accident was witnessed by two men in a third automobile parked across the street, and one of them called the police on the telephone and reported the accident.
After leaving his friend's home, the defendant returned in a few minutes, because his automobile could not be driven further due to damage caused by the accident. It had been his intention, he testified on the trial, to drive to the police station in the village and report the accident. Instead, on his return to his friend's house, he reported the accident by telephone to the police station. This call was made thirteen minutes after the accident. In the meantime, police officers investigating the accident had traced the defendant's automobile to the friend's house, and were notified by police radio that the defendant had reported the accident and was presently in the house. They then arrested the defendant on the charge for which he was convicted.
The statute lays a duty on a person driving an automobile causing damage to personal property of which he has knowledge of 'stopping, exhibiting his license and giving his name, residence, including street and number, and license number to the party sustaining the damage, or to a police officer, or in case no police officer nor the person sustaining the damage is present at the place where the damage occurred then reporting...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Gill
...is made known. See State v. Richardson, 23 Conn.Supp. 284, 181 A.2d 609, 611 (Cir.Ct.App.Div.1962); cf. People v. Hampton, 22 Misc.2d 432, 197 N.Y.S.2d 959, 961 (Cty.Ct.1960); State v. Severance, 120 Vt. 268, 138 A.2d 425, 428 (1958). Its constitutionality is not under attack here, and else......
-
Campbell v. Westmoreland Farm, Inc.
...making the required report including their identification (People v. Leigh, 1959, 19 Misc.2d 675, 189 N.Y.S.2d 573; People v. Hampton, 1960, 22 Misc.2d 432, 197 N.Y.S.2d 959) and its mandate is applicable to both motorists who are as well as those who are not at fault for the accident (Peop......
-
Miller v. Lewis
...not have violated any statute prohibiting leaving the scene of an accident ( see,Vehicle and Traffic Law § 600 and People v. Hampton, 22 Misc.2d 432, 197 N.Y.S.2d 959 [County Court Westchester County 1960] holding that a thirteen minute delay between the accident and reporting the accident ......
-
People v. Merolla
...in the length of time between defendant's leaving and returning to the accident scene to report his involvement (People v. Hampton, 22 Misc.2d 432, 433, 197 N.Y.S.2d 959 [Westchester County Ct.1960] [motorist involved in accident required to report to police or judicial officer as soon as p......