People ex rel. Brooks v. MacLean

New York Supreme Court

People ex rel. Brooks v. MacLean

11 N.Y.S. 311, 33 N.Y. St. Rep. 861, 1890 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 717

DecidedOctober 24, 1890

StatusPublished

This text of 11 N.Y.S. 311 (People ex rel. Brooks v. MacLean) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People ex rel. Brooks v. MacLean, 11 N.Y.S. 311, 33 N.Y. St. Rep. 861, 1890 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 717 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1890).

Pincite

Opinion

Van Brunt, P. J.

There is no ground shown by-this record for interfering with the determination of the respondents. The officer was charged with conduct unbecoming an officer,—being intoxicated. Various witnesses were examined to sustain the charge, a sergeant, several roundsmen, and a police surgeon, all "of whom saw the relator, and were of the opinion that the relator was under the influence of liquor, and unfit for duty. For the relator, his family physician, some patrolmen, and a citizen were examined, and their evidence tended to show that he was subject to fits, and that his condition may have been caused by an attack of the disease to which he was subject. This testimony was strengthened by the fact that but one of the witnesses who had testified that he was intoxicated thought that he smelled any liquor upon his breath; but this fact did not overthrow their testimony. In fact, notwithstanding this fact, upon the whole evidence, a jury might very well have come to the conclusion that the relator was under the influence of liquor. Under these circumstances the finding of.the police commissioners is final, and cannot be disturbed. The judgment should be affirmed, and the writ dismissed, with costs; All concur. .

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

Van Brunt, P. J.

There is no ground shown by-this record for interfering with the determination of the respondents. The officer was charged with conduct unbecoming an officer,—being intoxicated. Various witnesses were examined to sustain the charge, a sergeant, several roundsmen, and a police surgeon, all "of whom saw the relator, and were of the opinion that the relator was under the influence of liquor, and unfit for duty. For the relator, his family physician, some patrolmen, and a citizen were examined, and their evidence tended to show that he was subject to fits, and that his condition may have been caused by an attack of the disease to which he was subject. This testimony was strengthened by the fact that but one of the witnesses who had testified that he was intoxicated thought that he smelled any liquor upon his breath; but this fact did not overthrow their testimony. In fact, notwithstanding this fact, upon the whole evidence, a jury might very well have come to the conclusion that the relator was under the influence of liquor. Under these circumstances the finding of.the police commissioners is final, and cannot be disturbed. The judgment should be affirmed, and the writ dismissed, with costs; All concur. .

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 N.Y.S. 311, 33 N.Y. St. Rep. 861, 1890 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 717, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-brooks-v-maclean-nysupct-1890.