From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Walker

SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
May 30, 2014
43 Misc. 3d 142 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)

Opinion

570924/11

05-30-2014

The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Rodney Walker, Defendant-Appellant.


PRESENT: Schoenfeld, J.P., Shulman, Ling-Cohan, JJ.

In consolidated criminal actions, defendant appeals from two judgments of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (John Cataldo, J.H.O.), each rendered October 20, 2011, after a nonjury trial, convicting him of theft of services and harassment in the second degree, and imposing sentence.

Per Curiam.

Judgments of conviction (John Cataldo, J.H.O.), rendered October 20, 2011, affirmed.

The accusatory instruments underlying these consolidated Summons Part prosecutions were not jurisdictionally defective. Read together, the informations alleged that defendant, with the requisite intent to obtain transportation services without payment, "enter[ed]; the rear exit" of and remained on a municipal bus while "refus[ing]; to pay the fare," and thereafter "caus[ed]; a public annoyance" when he "threw his body toward" and "attempt[ed]; to knock . . . over" the responding police officers. These factual allegations, "given a fair and not overly restrictive or technical reading" (People v Casey, 95 NY2d 354, 360 [2000]), are sufficient for pleading purposes to establish reasonable cause to believe and a prima facie case that defendant was guilty of theft of services (see Penal Law § 165.15[3]; People v Pin, 41 Misc 3d 128[A], 2013 NY Slip Op 51681[U]; [App Term, 1st Dept 2013]) and second degree harassment (see Penal Law § 240.26[1]). With respect to the harassment charge, defendant's requisite intent to harass, annoy or alarm the police officers was properly inferable from the aggressive conduct attributed to defendant in the information relating to that charge (see generally People v Inserra, 4 NY3d 30 [2004]; cf. People v Hanneman, 19 Misc 3d 73, 74 [2008]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

I concur I concur I concur


Summaries of

People v. Walker

SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
May 30, 2014
43 Misc. 3d 142 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
Case details for

People v. Walker

Case Details

Full title:The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Rodney Walker…

Court:SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT

Date published: May 30, 2014

Citations

43 Misc. 3d 142 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 50849
993 N.Y.S.2d 645

Citing Cases

People v. Proctor

So viewed, the accusatory instrument charging theft of services (see Penal Law § 165.15[3]) was…