People v. Federico

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Federico

91 Misc. 2d 131, 397 N.Y.S.2d 515, 1977 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2256

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided April 21, 1977·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Memorandum. Judgment of conviction affirmed.

Defendant’s guilt of violating section 1 of article V of the Code of Ordinances of the Village of Ocean Beach in that he allowed an excursion boat to land in the Village of Ocean Beach was established beyond a reasonable doubt. Although defendant has questioned the constitutionality of the ordinance, i.e., that it is prohibitory rather than regulatory (see 9 NY Jur, Constitutional Law, § 196) and contends that it has been enforced in a discriminatory manner, defendant has failed to raise these issues in the proper manner (CPL 170.30, subd 1, par [a]; subd 2, 170.35 (subd 1, par [c]); 255.20, subd 3; People v Sullivan, 87 Misc 2d 254; People v Goodman, 31 NY2d 262, 268, 269). The fact that this court is unable to entertain said issues on this appeal does not leave defendant without a remedy. He may, if he be so advised, move pursuant to CPL 440.10 (subd 1, par [h]) to vacate the judgment on the [132] ground that it was obtained in violation of his rights under the Constitution of this State or the United States.

Concur: Farley, P. J., Glickman and Gagliardi, JJ.

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

Memorandum. Judgment of conviction affirmed.

Defendant’s guilt of violating section 1 of article V of the Code of Ordinances of the Village of Ocean Beach in that he allowed an excursion boat to land in the Village of Ocean Beach was established beyond a reasonable doubt. Although defendant has questioned the constitutionality of the ordinance, i.e., that it is prohibitory rather than regulatory (see 9 NY Jur, Constitutional Law, § 196) and contends that it has been enforced in a discriminatory manner, defendant has failed to raise these issues in the proper manner (CPL 170.30, subd 1, par [a]; subd 2, 170.35 (subd 1, par [c]); 255.20, subd 3; People v Sullivan, 87 Misc 2d 254; People v Goodman, 31 NY2d 262, 268, 269). The fact that this court is unable to entertain said issues on this appeal does not leave defendant without a remedy. He may, if he be so advised, move pursuant to CPL 440.10 (subd 1, par [h]) to vacate the judgment on the [132] ground that it was obtained in violation of his rights under the Constitution of this State or the United States.

Concur: Farley, P. J., Glickman and Gagliardi, JJ.

People v. Federico, 91 Misc. 2d 131, 397 N.Y.S.2d 515, 1977 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2256 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

91 Misc. 2d 131 (People v. Federico) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related