People v. Reick

• Citation: 33 Misc.3d 774,2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 21343,930 N.Y.S.2d 429
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Plaintiff,v.Timothy REICK, Defendant.
• Decision Date: 29 September 2011
• Court: New York Criminal Court

33 Misc.3d 774
930 N.Y.S.2d 429
2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 21343

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Plaintiff,
v.
Timothy REICK, Defendant.

Criminal Court, City of New York,New York County.

Sept. 29, 2011.

[930 N.Y.S.2d 430]

Evan Van Leer–Greenberg, Esq., The Law Offices of Van Leer & Greenberg, New York, for the Defendant.Elizabeth Dondlinger, Esq., Office of the District Attorney, New York, for the People.MATTHEW SCIARRINO JR., J.

[33 Misc.3d 774] The issue presented is whether a court has the power to issue a hardship license to an out-of-state driver, whose privileges to [33 Misc.3d 775] drive in New York was suspended as a result of his DWI arrest. This Court holds that it does have the authority and power to issue the hardship license.

The defendant, Timothy Reick, a New Jersey license-holder, was charged with driving while intoxicated (VTL 1192[3] ), driving while intoxicated per se (VTL 1192[2] ), and operating a motor vehicle while impaired (VTL 1192 [1] ). His license was suspended at the arraignment pursuant to VTL § 1193 [2][e][7] and he now moves the court to grant a hardship privilege pursuant to VTL § 1193[2][e][7][e].

Hardship Privilege

On September 23, 2011, this Court held a hardship hearing. This decision is a written confirmation of the oral decision issued that day.

While there are no published decisions dealing with the exact issue presented, there is some statutory precedent for out-of-state defendants being extended the same conditional driving privileges as a New York defendant. New York State Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1196(7) provides that an out-of-state defendant may be issued a “conditional privilege of operating a motor vehicle in this State,” as long as the defendant participates in the Drunk Driver Program.

However, this particular action is to be done at the discretion of the commissioner; the statute does not mention the court. ( See id.) Additionally, the term used throughout this part of the statute is “holder of a license,” not “licensee.” ( See id.) Thus, it does not directly answer any possible concerns about conditional privileges for “licensees” being extended to out-of-staters who have not been granted licenses by New York State.

In Pringle v. Wolfe, 88 N.Y.2d 426, 646 N.Y.S.2d 82, 668 N.E.2d 1376 [1996], the Court of Appeals recognized that the possibility of hardship privilege was an important element of the Prompt Suspension Law. The Court stated, “the severity of the license suspension is mitigated by its...