People v. Pierson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Pierson

190 A.D.2d 1070, 594 N.Y.S.2d 1016, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1311

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

DecidedFebruary 5, 1993

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 190 A.D.2d 1070 (People v. Pierson) 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. Pierson, 190 A.D.2d 1070, 594 N.Y.S.2d 1016, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1311 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

— Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant was convicted following a jury trial of driving while intoxicated as a felony. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (People v Malizia, 62 NY2d 755, 757, cert denied 469 US 932), we conclude that legally sufficient proof was adduced at trial to support defendant’s conviction (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495; see also, People v Smith, 179 AD2d 1060; People v Cole, 178 AD2d 1016). The proof concerning defendant’s intoxication was uncontroverted. It showed that he was "incapable of employing the physical and mental abilities which he [was] expected to possess in order to operate [his] vehicle as a reasonable and prudent driver” (People v Cruz, 48 NY2d 419, 428, appeal dismissed 446 US 901). The testimony of the defense witnesses presented only a question of credibility for the jury to resolve and we conclude that its resolution of that issue is not contrary to the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, supra, at 495). (Appeal from Judgment of Wyoming County Court, Punch, J. — Felony Driving While Intoxicated.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Green, Balio, Fallon and Doerr, JJ.

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

— Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant was convicted following a jury trial of driving while intoxicated as a felony. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (People v Malizia, 62 NY2d 755, 757, cert denied 469 US 932), we conclude that legally sufficient proof was adduced at trial to support defendant’s conviction (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495; see also, People v Smith, 179 AD2d 1060; People v Cole, 178 AD2d 1016). The proof concerning defendant’s intoxication was uncontroverted. It showed that he was "incapable of employing the physical and mental abilities which he [was] expected to possess in order to operate [his] vehicle as a reasonable and prudent driver” (People v Cruz, 48 NY2d 419, 428, appeal dismissed 446 US 901). The testimony of the defense witnesses presented only a question of credibility for the jury to resolve and we conclude that its resolution of that issue is not contrary to the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, supra, at 495). (Appeal from Judgment of Wyoming County Court, Punch, J. — Felony Driving While Intoxicated.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Green, Balio, Fallon and Doerr, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

190 A.D.2d 1070, 594 N.Y.S.2d 1016, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1311, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-pierson-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack