People v. Saylor

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Saylor

166 A.D.2d 899, 560 N.Y.S.2d 560, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12155

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

DecidedOctober 5, 1990

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 166 A.D.2d 899 (People v. Saylor) 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. Saylor, 166 A.D.2d 899, 560 N.Y.S.2d 560, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12155 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant was convicted of felony driving while intoxicated, aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle in the first degree and speeding. He contends on appeal that the evidence before the suppression court was insufficient to demonstrate that the police officer had reasonable suspicion to stop defendant’s vehicle for speeding. We disagree.

The issue at the hearing was not whether defendant was speeding, but whether the police officer had reasonable suspicion to believe that defendant was speeding. Although the officer did not testify in detail about his training, the court was entitled to assume, for purposes of this hearing, that a police officer with over a year’s experience can visually estimate the speed of a moving vehicle. Moreover, the radar unit clocked defendant’s speed at 54 miles per hour, adding additional support to the officer’s estimate. Although at trial it would be necessary for the People to establish that the radar unit was in proper working order (see, People v Knight, 72 NY2d 481), the suppression court properly concluded that such detailed proof was not required at a probable cause hearing. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Bergin, J.—felony driving while intoxicated.) Present —Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Boomer, Green and Balio, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant was convicted of felony driving while intoxicated, aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle in the first degree and speeding. He contends on appeal that the evidence before the suppression court was insufficient to demonstrate that the police officer had reasonable suspicion to stop defendant’s vehicle for speeding. We disagree.

The issue at the hearing was not whether defendant was speeding, but whether the police officer had reasonable suspicion to believe that defendant was speeding. Although the officer did not testify in detail about his training, the court was entitled to assume, for purposes of this hearing, that a police officer with over a year’s experience can visually estimate the speed of a moving vehicle. Moreover, the radar unit clocked defendant’s speed at 54 miles per hour, adding additional support to the officer’s estimate. Although at trial it would be necessary for the People to establish that the radar unit was in proper working order (see, People v Knight, 72 NY2d 481), the suppression court properly concluded that such detailed proof was not required at a probable cause hearing. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Bergin, J.—felony driving while intoxicated.) Present —Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Boomer, Green and Balio, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

166 A.D.2d 899, 560 N.Y.S.2d 560, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12155, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-saylor-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack