People v. Whipple

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Whipple

291 A.D.2d 663, 737 N.Y.S.2d 560, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1888

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

DecidedFebruary 21, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 291 A.D.2d 663 (People v. Whipple) 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. Whipple, 291 A.D.2d 663, 737 N.Y.S.2d 560, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1888 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Carpinello, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Sullivan County (LaBuda, J.), rendered December 17, 1998, upon a verdict convicting defendant of two counts of the crime of driving while intoxicated.

When this matter was previously before us, we determined that defendant’s motion for a trial order of dismissal should have been granted based on the People’s failure to establish the capacity of the parking lot in which he was driving while under the influence of alcohol (276 AD2d 829). The Court of Appeals reversed that determination and remitted the case to us pursuant to CPL 470.25 (2) (d) and CPL 470.40 (2) (b) (97 NY2d 1). Upon our review of the record, we reject as meritless the sole remaining contention advanced by defendant, to wit, that the proof concerning his blood alcohol content at the time of the accident was legally insufficient.

Cardona, P.J., Peters and Mugglin, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

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

—Carpinello, J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Sullivan County (LaBuda, J.), rendered December 17, 1998, upon a verdict convicting defendant of two counts of the crime of driving while intoxicated.

When this matter was previously before us, we determined that defendant’s motion for a trial order of dismissal should have been granted based on the People’s failure to establish the capacity of the parking lot in which he was driving while under the influence of alcohol (276 AD2d 829). The Court of Appeals reversed that determination and remitted the case to us pursuant to CPL 470.25 (2) (d) and CPL 470.40 (2) (b) (97 NY2d 1). Upon our review of the record, we reject as meritless the sole remaining contention advanced by defendant, to wit, that the proof concerning his blood alcohol content at the time of the accident was legally insufficient.

Cardona, P.J., Peters and Mugglin, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

291 A.D.2d 663, 737 N.Y.S.2d 560, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1888, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-whipple-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack