People v. Ambrozik

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Ambrozik

104 A.D.2d 693, 480 N.Y.S.2d 582, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20109

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

DecidedSeptember 20, 1984

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 104 A.D.2d 693 (People v. Ambrozik) 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

People v. Ambrozik, 104 A.D.2d 693, 480 N.Y.S.2d 582, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20109 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal from a judgment of the [694]*694County Court of Chemung County (Monroe, J.), rendered July 30, 1982, upon a verdict convicting defendant of two counts of the crime of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol.

Upon this record, it was proper for the court to submit to the jury, as a question of fact, whether the breathalyzer test was administered to defendant within two hours of his arrest for driving while intoxicated (see People v Keane, 76 AD2d 963). Additionally, we do not find the concurrent sentences imposed in this case, i.e., a $500 fine and one year in the county jail on the conviction for driving with at least .10% of alcohol in his blood (Vehicle and Traffic Law, § 1192, subd 2) and 60 days in the county jail on the conviction for driving while ability impaired by alcohol (Vehicle and Traffic Law, § 1192, subd 1), to be harsh or excessive.

Judgment affirmed. Mahoney, P. J., Kane, Casey, Weiss and Yesawich, Jr., JJ., concur.

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

— Appeal from a judgment of the [694]*694County Court of Chemung County (Monroe, J.), rendered July 30, 1982, upon a verdict convicting defendant of two counts of the crime of operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol.

Upon this record, it was proper for the court to submit to the jury, as a question of fact, whether the breathalyzer test was administered to defendant within two hours of his arrest for driving while intoxicated (see People v Keane, 76 AD2d 963). Additionally, we do not find the concurrent sentences imposed in this case, i.e., a $500 fine and one year in the county jail on the conviction for driving with at least .10% of alcohol in his blood (Vehicle and Traffic Law, § 1192, subd 2) and 60 days in the county jail on the conviction for driving while ability impaired by alcohol (Vehicle and Traffic Law, § 1192, subd 1), to be harsh or excessive.

Judgment affirmed. Mahoney, P. J., Kane, Casey, Weiss and Yesawich, Jr., JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

104 A.D.2d 693, 480 N.Y.S.2d 582, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20109, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-ambrozik-nyappdiv-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack