From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Monk

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 12, 1991
177 A.D.2d 602 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

November 12, 1991

Appeal from the County Court, Orange County (Pano Patsalos, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

In addition to the testimony of the police witnesses, there was testimony from several other witnesses that the defendant staggered when he walked, had an impaired sense of balance, had slurred speech, bloodshot eyes and an odor of alcohol on his breath. Additionally, the defendant admitted that he had consumed "a few drinks". Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish beyond a reasonable doubt the defendant's guilt of operating a motor vehicle while his ability to do so was impaired by the consumption of alcohol (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192; see generally, People v Cruz, 48 N.Y.2d 419; People v. Wirtz, 128 A.D.2d 745; People v Scalera, 118 A.D.2d 670). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15). Mangano, P.J., Bracken, Lawrence and O'Brien, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Monk

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 12, 1991
177 A.D.2d 602 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

People v. Monk

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. GEORGE MONK, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Nov 12, 1991

Citations

177 A.D.2d 602 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
576 N.Y.S.2d 172

Citing Cases

People v. Wassen

The arresting police officer, who had ample opportunity to observe defendant's condition, testified that upon…

People v. Johnson

The officer who administered the eye test also observed defendant's watery, bloodshot eyes and detected the…