People v. Sorg
| Citation | 3 Misc.2d 437,149 N.Y.S.2d 387 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York v. William Henry SORG, Jr. |
| Decision Date | 24 February 1956 |
| Court | New York City Court |
Harry L. Rosenthal, Dist. Atty., Rochester, Leon N. Armer, Asst. Dist. Atty., Rochester, of counsel, for the People.
Benjamin E. Solin, Rochester, for the defendant.
This is a motion to dismiss an information filed against the defendant, charging him with driving an automobile while in an intoxicated condition, in violation of Section 70, subdivision 5 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law of the State of New York. The information, in substance, states that the defendant, on the 20th day of January, 1956, in the City of Rochester, unlawfully drove and operated an automobile upon a public street while in an intoxicated condition; that on that day at approximately 3:45 P. M., the complainant police officer, in response to an accident call, arrived at the scene of an accident on South Union Street in the City of Rochester; that upon arriving at the scene, he found that two automobiles had been involved in an accident, one being a 1951 Chevrolet, bearing New York State license CM 8723, and another automobile whom the deponent later found out to be a 1953 Plymouth, bearing New York State license MV 3038. That the police officer complainant, after making an investigation of the accident, went to the home of the defendant in the City of Rochester at about 4:30 P. M. of the same day, and at that time had a conversation with the defendant, who stated to the police officer that he had been involved in the subject accident with his 1953 Plymouth bearing New York State license MV 3038, on South Union Street and that after he had struck the other vehicle, he left the scene of the accident, 'because he had been drinking quite a bit and did not want to be arrested for driving while intoxicated.' That the defendant stated he had not been drinking from the time of said accident up to the arrival of the police officer at his home. That the police officer observed the defendant at his home, and stated that the defendant's eyes were bloodshot, that his breath smelled of alcohol, that the defendant had his shoes off and as he went to get his shoes, he staggered as he walked, and that in the opinion of the police officer, the defendant was, at that time, in an intoxicated condition. The defendant first moves to dismiss the information on the ground that the Court lacks jurisdiction of the person of the defendant, contending that a police officer cannot make an arrest for a misdemeanor without a warrant unless the crime was committed in the presence of the arresting officer.
The contention of the defendant relating to his arrest is untenable. It is generally true that a police officer cannot make an arrest for a misdemeanor without a warrant unless the crime was committed in the presence of the arresting officer, Section 177, Code of Criminal Procedure. However, there is no question but that the arrest made here is lawful in view of the provisions of Section 70, subd. 5-c of the Vehicle and Traffic Law of the State of New York, which provides that an arrest can be made by a peace officer for a violation of Section 70, subdivision 5, driving while intoxicated, of the Vehicle and Traffic Law, even though not committed in his presence, when he has reasonable cause to believe that the violation was committed by such person. The defendant has been lawfully...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Carney
...evidence' of the commission of a crime (see People v. Belcher, 302 N.Y. 529, 534-535, 99 N.E.2d 874, 876-877, supra; People v. Sorg, 3 Misc.2d 437, 149 N.Y.S.2d 387), such protection should be afforded whether the prosecution is instituted by a warrant of arrest, an illegal arrest to which ......
-
People v. Haverty
...charged, to which facts the informant or the deponents can testify. People v. Belcher, 302 N.Y. 529, 99 N.E.2d 874; People v. Sorg, 3 Misc.2d 437, 149 N.Y.S.2d 387; People v. Orzechowski, 4 Misc.2d 484, 158 N.Y.S.2d Where the information is the basis for a warrant of arrest, and is not in f......
-
People v. James
...evidence' of the commission of a crime (see People v. Belcher, 302 N.Y. 529, 534-535, 99 N.E.2d 874, 876-877, supra; People v. Sorg, 3 Misc.2d 437, 149 N.Y.S.2d 387), such protection should be afforded whether the prosecution in instituted by a warrant of arrest, an illegal arrest to which ......
-
People v. Mosier
...had been committed and that appellant was probably guilty thereof, the rule expressed above would be satisfied. People v. Sorg, City Ct.Roch.1956, 3 Misc.2d 437, 149 N.Y.S.2d 387. On the contrary, however, the statement shows only that appellant had operated his car on South Side Parkway on......