People v. Fadale

92 A.D.2d 723, 461 N.Y.S.2d 129, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17021
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 28, 1983·Published·Cited by 1 cases

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

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).

92 A.D.2d 723 (People v. Fadale) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. DeJesus
192 A.D.2d 546 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)