People v. Fadale

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Fadale

92 A.D.2d 723, 461 N.Y.S.2d 129, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17021

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

DecidedFebruary 28, 1983

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 92 A.D.2d 723 (People v. Fadale) 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. Fadale, 92 A.D.2d 723, 461 N.Y.S.2d 129, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17021 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

— Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The breathalyzer test was properly admitted into evidence (see People v Farrell, 58 NY2d 637), and defendant’s guilt for driving while he had .10% or more by weight of alcohol in his blood as shown by chemical analysis of his breath (Vehicle and Traffic Law, § 1192, subds 2, 5) was established by legally sufficient evidence. The unresponsive answer to a single question propounded to the defendant by the officer did not constitute a process of interrogation that falls within the ambit of Miranda v Arizona (384 US 436; see People v Huffman, 41 NY2d 29). (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Easier, J. — driving while intoxicated.) Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Callahan, Denman, Boomer and Moule, JJ.

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

— Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The breathalyzer test was properly admitted into evidence (see People v Farrell, 58 NY2d 637), and defendant’s guilt for driving while he had .10% or more by weight of alcohol in his blood as shown by chemical analysis of his breath (Vehicle and Traffic Law, § 1192, subds 2, 5) was established by legally sufficient evidence. The unresponsive answer to a single question propounded to the defendant by the officer did not constitute a process of interrogation that falls within the ambit of Miranda v Arizona (384 US 436; see People v Huffman, 41 NY2d 29). (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Easier, J. — driving while intoxicated.) Present — Hancock, Jr., J. P., Callahan, Denman, Boomer and Moule, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

92 A.D.2d 723, 461 N.Y.S.2d 129, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17021, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-fadale-nyappdiv-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack