People v. Tedesche

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Tedesche

3 A.D.2d 220, 159 N.Y.S.2d 486, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6357

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

DecidedFebruary 26, 1957

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 3 A.D.2d 220 (People v. Tedesche) 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. Tedesche, 3 A.D.2d 220, 159 N.Y.S.2d 486, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6357 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The defendant, while in the custody of a police officer who told him he was under arrest, broke away and escaped. Through the interference of a crowd, the officer was prevented from immediately reapprehending the defendant or pursuing him. The charge for which the defendant was arrested was the illegal sale of fireworks, which is a misdemeanor by virtue of section 1894-a of the Penal Law.

Absent a warrant, a police officer may only arrest a defendant charged with a misdemeanor if the crime is committed in his presence (Code Crim. Pro. § 177; People v. Cherry, 307 N. Y. 308; People v. O’Connor, 257 N. Y. 473). Later that day, the defendant surrendered at a station house. He was thereafter arraigned upon the charge. The complaint was dismissed and the defendant discharged because the officer did not witness the alleged sale of the fireworks and the only witness who purportedly saw it could not be located. The defendant was then charged with escape from lawful custody (Penal Law, § 1694) and, after trial was convicted. There having been no legal arrest, the defendant was not in ‘ ‘ lawful custody ’ ’ within the meaning of the Penal Law, and his escape was not from the custody contemplated by section 1694. The judgment of conviction should therefore be reversed and the information dismissed.

Botein, J. P., Rabin, Frank, Valente and McNally, JJ., concur.

Judgment unanimously reversed and the information dismissed. Settle order on notice.

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

Per Curiam.

The defendant, while in the custody of a police officer who told him he was under arrest, broke away and escaped. Through the interference of a crowd, the officer was prevented from immediately reapprehending the defendant or pursuing him. The charge for which the defendant was arrested was the illegal sale of fireworks, which is a misdemeanor by virtue of section 1894-a of the Penal Law.

Absent a warrant, a police officer may only arrest a defendant charged with a misdemeanor if the crime is committed in his presence (Code Crim. Pro. § 177; People v. Cherry, 307 N. Y. 308; People v. O’Connor, 257 N. Y. 473). Later that day, the defendant surrendered at a station house. He was thereafter arraigned upon the charge. The complaint was dismissed and the defendant discharged because the officer did not witness the alleged sale of the fireworks and the only witness who purportedly saw it could not be located. The defendant was then charged with escape from lawful custody (Penal Law, § 1694) and, after trial was convicted. There having been no legal arrest, the defendant was not in ‘ ‘ lawful custody ’ ’ within the meaning of the Penal Law, and his escape was not from the custody contemplated by section 1694. The judgment of conviction should therefore be reversed and the information dismissed.

Botein, J. P., Rabin, Frank, Valente and McNally, JJ., concur.

Judgment unanimously reversed and the information dismissed. Settle order on notice.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 A.D.2d 220, 159 N.Y.S.2d 486, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6357, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-tedesche-nyappdiv-1957.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack