From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Spink

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 4, 1983
97 A.D.2d 963 (N.Y. App. Div. 1983)

Opinion

November 4, 1983

Appeal from the Ontario County Court, Reed, J.

Present — Dillon, P.J., Callahan, Green, O'Donnell and Schnepp, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Although the accident which resulted in defendant's conviction under subdivision 2 of section 1192 Veh. Traf. of the Vehicle and Traffic Law occurred at 1:30 A.M., it was not unreasonable for the investigating officer to first call an ambulance and clear the intersection before arresting defendant in the hospital emergency room at 2:55 A.M. Therefore, the breathalyzer test was timely administered to the defendant at 3:55 A.M. (Vehicle and Traffic Law, § 1194, subd 1, par [1]). The record indicates that the detention of the defendant at the scene of the accident resulted not from the activity of the police, but from the fact that defendant required medical assistance (see People v Porter, 46 A.D.2d 307, 310; cf. People v Brol, 81 A.D.2d 739). Testimony of defendant's inebriated condition by the arresting officer, the breathalyzer test operator and the driver of the other vehicle in the accident was relevant on the issue of the validity of the test result and served to corroborate that the test was properly administered.


Summaries of

People v. Spink

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 4, 1983
97 A.D.2d 963 (N.Y. App. Div. 1983)
Case details for

People v. Spink

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. FREDERICK G. SPINK…

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

Date published: Nov 4, 1983

Citations

97 A.D.2d 963 (N.Y. App. Div. 1983)

Citing Cases

People v. Odenweller

Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1194 (1) permits administration of a chemical test within two hours following…