People v. Rooney

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Rooney

441 N.E.2d 1113, 57 N.Y.2d 822, 455 N.Y.S.2d 595, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3725

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 7, 1982

StatusPublished

Cited by42 cases

This text of 441 N.E.2d 1113 (People v. Rooney) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Rooney, 441 N.E.2d 1113, 57 N.Y.2d 822, 455 N.Y.S.2d 595, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3725 (N.Y. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

The defendant was tried on an indictment charging him with criminally negligent homicide in that he “operated a motor vehicle at an excessive rate of speed, on the wrong side of the road while intoxicated and struck another vehicle” causing the death of another person. He was also charged in separate counts with driving while under the influence of alcohol. The defendant requested the court to charge the jury that he could not be found guilty of criminally negligent homicide unless it found that he had committed all of the acts mentioned in the indictment. The court refused the charge and the jury returned a verdict finding him not guilty of driving while under the influence of alcohol but guilty of criminally negligent homicide.

The court did not err in refusing to charge the jury as the defendant requested. Not every fact mentioned in an indictment is essential to establish the defendant’s guilt of the crime charged, and thus it is not necessary in every case that the People prove all acts alleged in the indictment when the remaining acts alleged are sufficient to sustain a conviction. In this case the jury could find that the defendant was criminally negligent when he drove the vehicle on the wrong side of the road while speeding even though he may not have been intoxicated at the time.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur; Judge Gabrielli taking no part.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

The defendant was tried on an indictment charging him with criminally negligent homicide in that he “operated a motor vehicle at an excessive rate of speed, on the wrong side of the road while intoxicated and struck another vehicle” causing the death of another person. He was also charged in separate counts with driving while under the influence of alcohol. The defendant requested the court to charge the jury that he could not be found guilty of criminally negligent homicide unless it found that he had committed all of the acts mentioned in the indictment. The court refused the charge and the jury returned a verdict finding him not guilty of driving while under the influence of alcohol but guilty of criminally negligent homicide.

The court did not err in refusing to charge the jury as the defendant requested. Not every fact mentioned in an indictment is essential to establish the defendant’s guilt of the crime charged, and thus it is not necessary in every case that the People prove all acts alleged in the indictment when the remaining acts alleged are sufficient to sustain a conviction. In this case the jury could find that the defendant was criminally negligent when he drove the vehicle on the wrong side of the road while speeding even though he may not have been intoxicated at the time.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur; Judge Gabrielli taking no part.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

441 N.E.2d 1113, 57 N.Y.2d 822, 455 N.Y.S.2d 595, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3725, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-rooney-ny-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack