People v. Singer

• Decision Date: 20 November 1962
• Citation: 236 N.Y.S.2d 1012
• Parties: PEOPLE of the State of New York v. Francis J. SINGER, Defendant-Appellant.
• Court: New York County Court

Page 1012

236 N.Y.S.2d 1012

PEOPLE of the State of New York v. Francis J. SINGER, Defendant-Appellant.

Suffolk County Court.

Nov. 20, 1962.

Bernard C. Smith, Dist. Atty. of Suffolk County, Riverhead, for the people.

Edward LaFreniere, Riverhead, for defendant-appellant.

HENRY TASKER, Justice.

Convicted of a violation of Vehicle and Traffic Law, § 1192, subd . 2, after trial before a Justice of the Peace, Town of Southampton, sitting as a Court of Special Sessions without a jury, defendant appeals to this Court. Error is assigned in the admission into evidence of testimony by the medical witness as to defendant's condition; in the admission of blood test results over objection with respect to the qualifications of the prosecution's expert and the foundation for the expert's opinion in view of the nature of the test performed and inability of the expert to testify whether the sample which he tested was in fact blood; and in the admission into evidence of the blood sample kit after the prosecution had rested its case.

Treating these matters seriatim, the record reveals that defendant, after being injured in an automobile collision, was taken by a police officer to a doctor's office for examination and treatment of his injuries. He was hospitalized for 8 days after the accident. While undergoing emergency treatment, the officer allegedly placed defendant under arrest and requested him to consent to the taking of a blood sample. The physician, using a medical kit supplied by the police, extracted blood for diagnostic purposes and gave the sample to the arresting officer. The doctor, called as a witness by the prosecution, testified both to the taking of blood and his observations with respect to defendant's condition, stating that, both from his observation and from information derived from the blood test result, (which was not then in evidence), that his patient was intoxicated. All of the foregoing testimony was received over defendant's objections.

It is now clear that, notwithstanding the existence of a physician-patient relationship, a doctor who extracts a blood sample pursuant to Vehicle and Traffic Law, § 1194 may testify with respect to the taking of blood only. (People v. Downs, 5 App.Div.2d 935, 172 N.Y.S.2d 377; People v. Cook, 25 Misc.2d 722, 205 N.Y.S.2d 489). In the matter at bar, the physician's testimony went much further. Although the facts clearly establish a physician-patient relationship, the Court below permitted the doctor to testify, over objection, to defendant's physical condition, mental state, responses, and to express an opinion as to defendant's intoxication. This...