People v. Moore

• Decision Date: 25 June 2003
• Citation: 765 N.Y.S.2d 218,196 Misc.2d 340
• Court: New York Justice Court
• Parties: THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Plaintiff,<BR>v.<BR>DAVID S. MOORE, Defendant.

196 Misc.2d 340

765 N.Y.S.2d 218

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Plaintiff,

v.DAVID S. MOORE, Defendant.

June 25, 2003.

No appearances.

OPINION OF THE COURT

GLENN G. GALBREATH, J.

This matter came before the court on a simplified traffic information alleging that defendant, David S. Moore, violated section 1225-c (2) (a) of the Vehicle and Traffic Law prohibiting "operat[ing] a motor vehicle upon a public highway while using a mobile telephone to engage in a call while such vehicle is in motion" when defendant was in the parking lot of the Community Corners shopping center in the Village of Cayuga Heights on November 11, 2002 at 5:00 P.M. Trial was held on June 7, 2003. The arresting officer, J.L. Wright of the Cayuga Heights Police Department, was the only witness who testified. No exhibits were admitted.

After consideration of the evidence presented, the court makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law and enters an order accordingly.

Findings of Fact

On November 11, 2002, at approximately 5:00 P.M., Officer Wright observed defendant, David S. Moore, driving a motor vehicle moving in a northeasterly direction within the parking lot of Community Corners. Community Corners is a privately owned shopping center next to Hanshaw Road within the Village of Cayuga Heights. Defendant was speaking on a mobile telephone while driving. Officer Wright stopped defendant's vehicle on Hanshaw Road after defendant left the parking lot. Officer Wright did not observe defendant speaking on the telephone while defendant drove on Hanshaw Road. No evidence was presented refuting these facts.

While there was some cross-examination of the officer concerning his initial location, defendant's use/nonuse of a seat belt, and the officer/defendant conversation after the stop, the court finds these issues unrelated to the elements of the charge and the officer's testimony credible. The court finds beyond a reasonable doubt that on November 11, 2002 defendant operated a moving motor vehicle while using a mobile telephone to engage in a call while in a private parking lot within the Village of Cayuga Heights.

Conclusions of Law

The only remaining issue in this case is location—whether use of a mobile telephone while driving a motor vehicle is prohibited in a private parking lot. The court could find no case law directly answering this question.

Generally the Vehicle and Traffic Law regulates activity occurring "upon public highways, private roads open to public motor vehicle traffic and any other parking lot" (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1100 [a]). And because there is an obvious risk of injuring pedestrians and property in parking lots, it would make sense for the Legislature to regulate simultaneous driving and telephone use in parking lots. But section 1100 (a) limits itself, inter alia, by adding "except where a different place is specifically referred to in a given section." Therefore, if a traffic infraction statute specifically identifies the location(s) where the activity is prohibited, that statute controls and not section 1100's broader definition of the locations.

Section 1225-c (2) (a) has such a limitation and only prohibits simultaneous driving and mobile phone use if the driver is "upon a public highway." Had the Legislature excluded this language, then phone use while driving would have been prohibited in...