People v. Harrison

CourtNew York Magistrate Court
Citation173 N.Y.S.2d 128,11 Misc.2d 445
Decision Date10 April 1958
PartiesThe PEOPLE of the State of New York, Plaintiff, v. Leroy HARRISON and Walter Bolden, Defendants. City Magistrates' Court of New York, Felony Court, Borough of Queens

Page 128

173 N.Y.S.2d 128
11 Misc.2d 445
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Plaintiff,
v.
Leroy HARRISON and Walter Bolden, Defendants.
City Magistrates' Court of New York, Felony Court, Borough
of Queens.
April 10, 1958.

Page 129

[11 Misc.2d 446] Arthur Gray, Asst. Dist. Atty. for Queens County, Long Island City, for plaintiff.

Allan Sturim, Long Island City, and Sidney G. Sparrow, Ridgewood, for defendants.

CHARLES SOLOMON, City Magistrate.

In this case, as in People v. Feliciano, Mag.Ct., 173 N.Y.S.2d 123, the need for revision of Sec. 722 of the Penal Law is indicated. The complaint charges:

'* * * that at 3 A.M. on April 5th, 1958, at Lefferts Boulevard station on 'A' train in the County of Queens, City and State of New York, the defendants Leroy Harrison and Walter Bolden, while acting together and in concert with each other, committed the offense of disorderly conduct in violation of Section 722, subdivision 6 of the Penal Law, in that with intent to provoke a breach of the peace and under circumstances whereby a breach of the peace might be occasioned, the defendants entered the third car of the train, Harrison seated himself next to a sleeping man and defendant Bolden stationed himself next to the door. Harrison placed his right hand inside the right jacket pocket of the sleeping man. Deponent placed the defendants under arrest.' (Emphasis supplied.) Sec. 722, subd. 6 reads:

'Any person who with intent to provoke a breach of the peace, or whereby a breach of the peace may be occasioned, commits any of the following acts shall be deemed to have committed the offense of disorderly conduct. (Emphasis supplied.)'

'6. Interferes with any person in any place by jostling against such person or unnecessarily crowding him or by placing a hand in the proximity of such person's pocket, pocketbook or handbag;'

The defendant Harrison, represented by counsel, had pleaded guilty. The defendant Bolden was acquitted. The arresting officer, a New York City transit policeman, testified that his post of observation was a 'darkened dead train' about eight feet away, that the train in which the defendants were riding pulled into the Lefferts Boulevard terminal which was virtually deserted, that the defendants came out upon the platform

Page 130

where they had a discussion, that they then entered the next car where the sleeping man was; that Bolden, at Harrison's direction, took a position in the second car from which he could observe the car from which they had come, that Harrison sat next to the intended victim and, at a signal from Bolden, put his hand under the coat of the former, and that he saw Harrison tug at the inside pocket. The arrest followed promptly. The sleeping man did not awaken. The court said in substance that notwithstanding he believed the testimony of the People's witnesses the record required acquittal of the defendant Bolden. People [11 Misc.2d 447] v. Feliciano, supra....

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 practice notes
  • People v. Evans
    • United States
    • New York Court of Special Sessions
    • 27 Octubre 1959
    ...defendant in this case be enabled by the law itself to find effective shelter behind such convenient legal ramparts'. People v. Harrison, 11 Misc.2d 445, 448, 173 N.Y.S.2d 128, Judgment reversed, complaint dismissed and the fine is ordered remitted. ARTHUR DUNAIF, J., concurs. [19 Misc.2d 1......
  • Baka v. Board of Ed. of City of New York
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • 24 Abril 1958
    ...to the proof that the parties agreed to pay the plaintiffs upon reinstatement the same salary which the first 50 teachers were then [11 Misc.2d 445] receiving is granted. All other motions on which decision was reserved during the trial are Plaintiffs (except Sharp, whose action was discont......
2 cases
  • People v. Evans
    • United States
    • New York Court of Special Sessions
    • 27 Octubre 1959
    ...defendant in this case be enabled by the law itself to find effective shelter behind such convenient legal ramparts'. People v. Harrison, 11 Misc.2d 445, 448, 173 N.Y.S.2d 128, Judgment reversed, complaint dismissed and the fine is ordered remitted. ARTHUR DUNAIF, J., concurs. [19 Misc.2d 1......
  • Baka v. Board of Ed. of City of New York
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • 24 Abril 1958
    ...to the proof that the parties agreed to pay the plaintiffs upon reinstatement the same salary which the first 50 teachers were then [11 Misc.2d 445] receiving is granted. All other motions on which decision was reserved during the trial are Plaintiffs (except Sharp, whose action was discont......

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