People v. Frank (Ramon)
This text of People v. Frank (Ramon) (People v. Frank (Ramon)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
against
Ramon Frank, Defendant-Appellant.
Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (John Cataldo, J.H.O.), rendered September 24, 2014, after a nonjury trial, convicting him of disorderly conduct, and imposing sentence.
Per Curiam.
Judgment of conviction (John Cataldo, J.H.O.), rendered September 24, 2014, reversed, on the law, the facts, and as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, and the accusatory instrument is dismissed.
The verdict convicting the defendant of disorderly conduct pursuant to Penal Law § 240.20(5) was not based on legally sufficient evidence and was, in any event, against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342 [2007]). Absent from the record is the essential quantum of proof that defendant intended to cause or recklessly created the risk of "a potential or immediate public problem" (People v Munafo, 50 NY2d 326, 331 [1980]), when his vehicle blocked two vehicles in the northbound lane of traffic on a two-way street for approximately "30 seconds" (see People v Johnson, 22 NY3d 1162, 1164 [2014]; People v Ortiz, 63 Misc 3d 32 [App Term, 1st Dept 2019]).
We note the absence of a respondent's brief.
In view of our determination, we reach no other issue.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
I concur I concur
Decision Date: January 17, 2020
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
People v. Frank (Ramon), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-frank-ramon-nyappterm-2020.