People v. Lesinski
| Decision Date | 12 March 1958 |
| Citation | 10 Misc.2d 254,171 N.Y.S.2d 339 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. Richard LESINSKI, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court |
Pelowski, Janik & Olszewski, Buffalo (John J. Olszewski, Buffalo, of counsel), for defendant-appellant.
John F. Dwyer, Dist. Atty., Buffalo (Robert A. Burrell, Asst. Dist. Atty., Buffalo, of counsel), for the People.
The defendant was arraigned on July 29, 1957, in the City Court of Buffalo on charges of violating section 70, subds. 5 and 5-a of the Vehicle and Traffic Law, involving the operation of a motor vehicle while in an intoxicated condition and leaving the scene of an accident without reporting it, respectively; to which the defendant pleaded guilty as charged, when not represented by counsel. Thereafter, the defendant retained an attorney, withdrew his guilty plea and pleaded not guilty. On November 20, 1957, after a trial before a court and jury, the defendant was found guilty on both charges and convicted. He was sentenced to ten days in the County Penitentiary, fined $100 on each charge, and his operator's license was revoked.
One Januale, a patrolman is the Buffalo Police Department, who had sworn to the information charging the defendant with both crimes, testified at length for the People. Then on cross-examination he stated that he and his 'partner', one Shephard, another policeman, apprehended the defendant about 11:15 p.m. on July 28, 1957. About 11:40 p.m. that same night, a urine sample of the defendant was taken in a bottle; a salt solution was placed in the bottle which was then placed in the witness' pocket. At about 1:00 a.m. the next day, the witness took the bottle to his home, placed it underneath a vanity dresser in his bedroom, until the next morning at 8:00 a.m. when he picked up the bottle; later he delivered it to one O'Connor, a police chemist assigned to the Scientific Crime Detection laboratory at police headquarters, at 12:00 noon on July 29, 1957. The witness stated that his mother, father-in-law and wife lived with him at his home where the bottle had been kept all night.
Later in the cross-examination of said witness Januale, he testified that he had given certain information to a warrant clerk who wrote out an information identified as Defendant's Exhibit 'C' which the witness signed. The Trial Court identified the information as: 'An affidavit of Ralph E. Januale, dated July 29th, 1957, under docket number 14323, information for drunken driving.' When the Court asked: 'Now, what is the probative value of this?' the attorney for the defendant said: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jones v. Forrest City
...Department of Health. However likely it may be that they are one and the same, the State has failed to prove it.' In People v. Lesinski, 10 Misc.2d 254, 171 N.Y.S.2d 339, two members of the Buffalo Police Department arrested the defendant about 11:15 PM. A urine sample was taken about 11:40......
-
People v. Pfendler
...361). See also, People v. McConnell, 19 Misc.2d 1050, 192 N.Y.S.2d 177; People v. Goedkoop, Co.Ct., 202 N.Y.S.2d 498; People v. Lesinski, 10 Misc.2d 254, 171 N.Y.S.2d 339; People v. Herman, 8 Misc.2d 991, 166 N.Y.S.2d The judgment of conviction is therefore reversed on the law and the facts......
-
People v. Goedkoop
...the first instance that the chain of identification of the sample was not established, as required by the authorities (People v. Lesinski, 10 Misc.2d 254, 171 N.Y.S.2d 339; People v. Sansalone, 208 Misc. 491, 146 N.Y.S.2d 359). Doubtless, as these cases hold, proof that the specimen was acc......
-
People v. McFarren
...and identity and unchanged condition must be first established before the specimen may be allowed in evidence (People v. Lesinski, 10 Misc .2d 254, 171 N.Y.S.2d 339). The information alleging the violation and the acts constituting the infraction was insufficient. The statute requires reaso......