State v. Markey, No. Mv 99 023 4981 S (Dec. 14, 1999)

Connecticut Superior Court

State v. Markey, No. Mv 99 023 4981 S (Dec. 14, 1999)

1999 Conn. Super. Ct. 16053

CourtConnecticut Superior Court

DecidedDecember 14, 1999

DocketNo. MV 99 023 4981 S

StatusUnpublished

This text of 1999 Conn. Super. Ct. 16053 (State v. Markey, No. Mv 99 023 4981 S (Dec. 14, 1999)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Superior Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Markey, No. Mv 99 023 4981 S (Dec. 14, 1999), 1999 Conn. Super. Ct. 16053 (Colo. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION On July 24th, 1999, the defendant, Ronald E. Markey was charged with Violation of Connecticut Statute § 14-227a Driving while Intoxicated. CT Page 16054

On July 24th, 1999, Police Officer Galdenzi was on his way to East Haven to conduct a follow up investigation to a domestic matter. Officer Galdenzi observed the defendant's vehicle stopped several car lengths away from the traffic light located at the intersection of Summit place and West Main Street. Officer Galdenzi notified dispatch of the vehicle's location and officer Beno arrived at the location followed a short time later by Sergeant Albert. Officer Galdenzi testified that the reason he called dispatch was due to his concern about the automobile. He believed that the motorist was either intoxicated or needed some mechanical assistance. Officer Beno was the officer that actually conducted the investigation of the automobile that had been stopped for sometime. Officer Beno observed the defendant to be unconscious and slumped over the steering wheel of his vehicle. After emergency personnel arrived and revived the defendant, Officer Beno conducted the standard on-sight sobriety tests. After the defendant failed these tests Officer Beno made a determination that the defendant was in fact intoxicated and charged him with violating C.G.S. § 14-227a.

The court believes that the testimony of Police Officer Beno and Sergeant Albert to be credible and the court also holds that the officers in this case had the justification and the responsibility to investigate this vehicle that was stopped on the highway for no apparent reason.

Based on the above-mentioned facts, and the credible testimony of the Police Officers, the defendant's motion to dismiss is denied.

Howard T. Owens, Jr., Judge of the Superior Court

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

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION On July 24th, 1999, the defendant, Ronald E. Markey was charged with Violation of Connecticut Statute § 14-227a Driving while Intoxicated. CT Page 16054

On July 24th, 1999, Police Officer Galdenzi was on his way to East Haven to conduct a follow up investigation to a domestic matter. Officer Galdenzi observed the defendant's vehicle stopped several car lengths away from the traffic light located at the intersection of Summit place and West Main Street. Officer Galdenzi notified dispatch of the vehicle's location and officer Beno arrived at the location followed a short time later by Sergeant Albert. Officer Galdenzi testified that the reason he called dispatch was due to his concern about the automobile. He believed that the motorist was either intoxicated or needed some mechanical assistance. Officer Beno was the officer that actually conducted the investigation of the automobile that had been stopped for sometime. Officer Beno observed the defendant to be unconscious and slumped over the steering wheel of his vehicle. After emergency personnel arrived and revived the defendant, Officer Beno conducted the standard on-sight sobriety tests. After the defendant failed these tests Officer Beno made a determination that the defendant was in fact intoxicated and charged him with violating C.G.S. § 14-227a.

The court believes that the testimony of Police Officer Beno and Sergeant Albert to be credible and the court also holds that the officers in this case had the justification and the responsibility to investigate this vehicle that was stopped on the highway for no apparent reason.

Based on the above-mentioned facts, and the credible testimony of the Police Officers, the defendant's motion to dismiss is denied.

Howard T. Owens, Jr., Judge of the Superior Court

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1999 Conn. Super. Ct. 16053, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-markey-no-mv-99-023-4981-s-dec-14-1999-connsuperct-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack