People v. Kaufman
| Decision Date | 07 October 1965 |
| Citation | 47 Misc.2d 1074,264 N.Y.S.2d 81 |
| Court | New York City Court |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Plaintiff, v. Mitchell KAFMAN, Defendant. |
Ellsworth A. Monahan, Director, Legal Bureau, Police Dept., New York City (John J. Maguire, New York City, of counsel), for the People.
Henry M. diSuvero, New York City, for defendant.
Defendant herein was charged and tried for violation of Article II, Section 6 of the Rules and Regulations of the Department of Parks of the City of New York.
The evidence presented at the trial showed that on July 1, 1965 at about 7:50 P.M. the defendant had distributed mimeographed circulars on the sidewalk adjacent to the entrance to Tompkins Square Park. The circulars, one of which was offered and received in evidence consisted of a rather strongly worded attack on our federal government for its military involvement in Viet Nam and in the Dominican Republic. It was signed 'Tompkins Square Neighbors for Peace Action'. Pictures submitted in evidence and testimony made it clear that the leaflet distribution was peaceful and involved no public turmoil. There is no evidence whatsoever that the distribution made on the sidewalk outside of the park caused any disturbance to those using the park for recreation and rest or in any way interfered with the use of either the park or its adjacent sidewalks for such normal park purposes.
Article II, Section 6 of the Rules and Regulations of the Department of Parks of the City of New York, the first sentence of which provides:
'No person shall distribute, display, transport, carry, or construct any flag, banner, sign, emblem, model, device, pictorial representation, or other matter within any park or park-street for advertising or political purposes.'
Article I, Section 1, subd. c, defines 'park-street' as 'All street property around the park for the full width thereof.' The authority of the Commissioner to establish the Rules and Regulations quoted above is established by Sections 532 and 534 of the New York City Charter.
It is the contention of the People that when the defendant herein distributed the leaflet described above he violated the ban in Article II, Section 6 on the distribution of 'other matter' for 'political purposes.' Defendant does not question the charge of distribution of political matter but contends that the regulation so applied is a violation of his constitutional right under the First Amendment, to make public distribution of non-commercial handbills on any public thoroughfare.
In People v. Nahman, 298 N.Y. 95, 81 N.E.2d 36 (1948) and in People v. Hass, 299 N.Y. 190, 86 N.E.2d 169 (1949), app. dis. 338 U.S. 803, 70 S.Ct. 66, 94 L.Ed. 486 (1949), our Court of Appeals held with respect to another section of the Park Department's Rules and Regulations, Article III, Section 21-a, the regulation was constitutional since its sole objective was 'the safety, comfort and convenience of the people of the city in their appropriate uses of its public parks.' But in Commonwealth v. Dubin, 327 Mass. 681, 100 N.E.2d 843 (1951) the rule governing reservations under control of the metropolitan district provided that no one should post or print any sign, placard or 'other advertising device.' Defendant in Dubin had posted signs on streets at a public beach reading 'We Want Peace' and so on. The Massachusetts Court, refusing to give the ruel a narrow construction, struck down the rule saying (pp. 682-683, 100 N.E.2d p. 844),
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Yolen
...987, 8 L.Ed.2d 130 (1962). This regulation was recently reviewed by the Criminal Court of the City of New York in People v. Kaufman, 47 Misc.2d 1074, 264 N.Y.S.2d 81 (1965). In this case the defendant was charged with distributing political literature in a New York City park. In finding the......
-
People v. Gottfried
... ... I do not consider the defendant's conduct less worthy of protection than flying a kite carrying a political message within the park grounds (People v. Yolen, 49 Misc.2d 470, 267 N.Y.S.2d 925) or disseminating political tracts in a park (People v. Kaufman, 47 Misc.2d 1074, 264 N.Y.S.2d 81) ... For the Constitutional reasons above cited and because of the interpretation given by me to the regulation (People v. Barber, 289 N.Y. 378, 385, 46 N.E.2d 329), it would appear that the defendant is ... ...