Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

The People of the State of New York v. Martin J. Finn

New York Supreme and/or Appellate Courts SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS


December 10, 2012

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK,
RESPONDENT,
v.
MARTIN J. FINN,
APPELLANT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Justice Court of the Village of Bronxville, Westchester County (George C. McKinnis, J.), rendered April 8, 2011.

People v Finn (Martin)

Appellate Term, Second Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on

PRESENT: LaCAVA, J.P., IANNACCI and LaSALLE, JJ

The judgment, after a non-jury trial, convicted defendant of disobeying a traffic control device.

ORDERED that the judgment of conviction is reversed, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, the accusatory instrument is dismissed, and the fine, if paid, is remitted.

Following a non-jury trial, defendant was convicted of disobeying a traffic control device by failing to stop at a red light (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1110 [a]).

Defendant did not preserve for appellate review his contention that the People failed to present legally sufficient evidence. Nevertheless, reviewing that contention in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction (see CPL 470.15 [3] [c]), and viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, we find that the evidence failed to support defendant's conviction (see People v Farrell, 61 AD3d 696 [2009]). The Justice Court found that defendant's vehicle entered the intersection when the light was yellow. However, it reached the wrong conclusion of law when it held that, since the light had turned red before the vehicle had exited the intersection, defendant was guilty of disobeying a red traffic light. Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1111 (b) (1) provides that traffic facing a steady circular yellow signal may enter an intersection. Therefore, given the Justice Court's finding that defendant's vehicle entered the subject intersection when the traffic light was yellow, defendant was not guilty of violating Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1110 (a).

Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is reversed and the accusatory instrument is dismissed.

LaCava, J.P., Iannacci and LaSalle, JJ., concur. Decision Date: December 10, 2012

20121210

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.