Carey v. Melton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Carey v. Melton

64 A.D.2d 983, 408 N.Y.S.2d 817, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12960

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedSeptember 25, 1978

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 64 A.D.2d 983 (Carey v. Melton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Carey v. Melton, 64 A.D.2d 983, 408 N.Y.S.2d 817, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12960 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to set aside an order of the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles which, after a hearing, revoked the petitioner’s driver’s license because of his refusal to submit to a chemical test to determine the alcoholic content of his blood, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Orange County, dated September 7, 1977, which dismissed the petition. Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements. On the record presented, there is support for Special Term’s finding that the petitioner was properly arrested, that he was requested to submit to a chemical test of his blood, that he was properly warned of the penalty for the refusal to take the test and that he refused to take it. We note that there is evidence that the petitioner may not have fully comprehended the consequences of his refusal because he was so intoxicated by the consumption of alcohol and/or the inhalation of toxic fumes. Nevertheless, we do not construe the statutory warning contained in subdivision 2 of section 1194 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law as requiring a "knowing” refusal by the petitioner. This interpretation would lead to the absurd result that the greater the degree of intoxication of an automobile driver, the less the degree of his accountabiity. Hopkins, J. P., Martuscello, Rabin and Margett, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to set aside an order of the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles which, after a hearing, revoked the petitioner’s driver’s license because of his refusal to submit to a chemical test to determine the alcoholic content of his blood, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Orange County, dated September 7, 1977, which dismissed the petition. Judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements. On the record presented, there is support for Special Term’s finding that the petitioner was properly arrested, that he was requested to submit to a chemical test of his blood, that he was properly warned of the penalty for the refusal to take the test and that he refused to take it. We note that there is evidence that the petitioner may not have fully comprehended the consequences of his refusal because he was so intoxicated by the consumption of alcohol and/or the inhalation of toxic fumes. Nevertheless, we do not construe the statutory warning contained in subdivision 2 of section 1194 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law as requiring a "knowing” refusal by the petitioner. This interpretation would lead to the absurd result that the greater the degree of intoxication of an automobile driver, the less the degree of his accountabiity. Hopkins, J. P., Martuscello, Rabin and Margett, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

64 A.D.2d 983, 408 N.Y.S.2d 817, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12960, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carey-v-melton-nyappdiv-1978.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack