People v. Hemleb

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Hemleb

4 A.D.2d 878, 166 N.Y.S.2d 837, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4369

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

DecidedOctober 14, 1957

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 4 A.D.2d 878 (People v. Hemleb) 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. Hemleb, 4 A.D.2d 878, 166 N.Y.S.2d 837, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4369 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of a City Magistrate, holding a Court of Special Sessions in the City of New York, Borough of Queens, convicting appellant of operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated, and sentencing him to pay a fine of $100. The fine was paid. Judgment reversed on the law and the facts, information dismissed, and fine remitted. There is no proof in the record that appellant operated the motor vehicle while intoxicated, other than his ambiguous admission, made while intoxicated, that he had been driving the ear. In the absence of additional proof as to operation, this conviction may not stand (Code Grim. Pro., § 395; People v. Strauss, 260 App. Div. 880; People v. Cuozzo, 292 N. Y. 85; People v. Shanks, 201 Mise. 511, affd. 279 App. Div. 1082). Nolan, P. J., Wenzel, Beldock, Murphy and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal from a judgment of a City Magistrate, holding a Court of Special Sessions in the City of New York, Borough of Queens, convicting appellant of operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated, and sentencing him to pay a fine of $100. The fine was paid. Judgment reversed on the law and the facts, information dismissed, and fine remitted. There is no proof in the record that appellant operated the motor vehicle while intoxicated, other than his ambiguous admission, made while intoxicated, that he had been driving the ear. In the absence of additional proof as to operation, this conviction may not stand (Code Grim. Pro., § 395; People v. Strauss, 260 App. Div. 880; People v. Cuozzo, 292 N. Y. 85; People v. Shanks, 201 Mise. 511, affd. 279 App. Div. 1082). Nolan, P. J., Wenzel, Beldock, Murphy and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 A.D.2d 878, 166 N.Y.S.2d 837, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4369, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-hemleb-nyappdiv-1957.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack