People v. Kasprzyk

• Decision Date: 06 February 1969
• Citation: 298 N.Y.S.2d 334,59 Misc.2d 236
• Parties: PEOPLE of the State of New York, Plaintiff, v. Michael C. KASPRZYK, Defendant.
• Court: New York Justice Court

Page 334

298 N.Y.S.2d 334

59 Misc.2d 236

PEOPLE of the State of New York, Plaintiff, v. Michael C. KASPRZYK, Defendant.

Justice Court, Town of Aurora.

Feb. 6, 1969.

Ronald Bennett, for defendant.

DECISION

DAVID K. FLOYD, Town Justice.

Defendant, by an information set forth in a uniform traffic ticket issued by State Trooper Musik, has been charged with violating Section 1180(b) of the Vehicle and Traffic Law by driving a motor vehicle at 65 miles per hour in a zone regulated by the statutory maximum speed of 50 miles per hour. The violation is alleged to have occurred on November 19, 1968, on State Highway 16 north of the southerly boundary of the Town of Aurora.

The matter was tried before this Court on January 27, 1969, and while the proof was closed, the prosecution and counsel for the defendant have stipulated that the matter be adjourned to February 10, 1969, for its conclusion and final disposition.

The Court finds that the People have proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was in fact traveling at a speed in excess of 50 miles per hour at the time and place charged in the information. Defendant, however, at the conclusion of the People's case and at the conclusion of all of the proof, moved for acquittal and dismissal of the information on the ground that the People failed to prove the maximum speed limit on the stretch of the State Highway where the violation was alleged to have occurred.

No proof was in fact presented by the People as to the speed limit or to the absence of traffic signs denoting a restricted speed limit on this stretch of highway. Section 1180(b) of the Vehicle and Traffic Law provides as follows:

'(b) Except when a special hazard exists that requires lower speed for compliance with subdivision (a) of this section Or when maximum speed limits have been established as hereinafter authorized no person shall drive a vehicle at a speed in excess of fifty miles per hour.' (Emphasis added.)

Thus, but for the exception emphasized, this statute sets forth a statutory maximum speed as to which defendant would be deemed to have notice and which he has been found to have exceeded. The question for determination, then, is whether the prosecution's case fails for want of proof that there were no Higher speed limits established pursuant to the authority granted by this statute.

The Court, of course, is fully conversant with the fact that no speeds in excess of fifty miles per hour are permitted in the Town of Aurora. This personal knowledge, however, is not sufficient to satisfy the criteria for proof by the prosecution in a proceeding of this nature.

The establishment of speed restrictions at other than the statutory maximum of fifty miles per hour are specifically authorized under various sections of the Vehicle and Traffic Law referred to in Sections 1180(c) and (d). The only pertinent authority is found in Section 1620 which provides, as far as applicable here, as follows:

S 1620. SPEED LIMITS ON STATE HIGHWAYS, AND ON INDIAN RESERVATIONS

(a) The department of transportation with respect to state highways maintained by the state outside of cities having a population in excess of one million, and highways on Indian reservations, may be order, rule or regulation establish higher or lower maximum speed limits at which...