From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Cole

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 26, 1991
178 A.D.2d 1016 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

December 26, 1991

Appeal from the Cattaraugus County Court, Kelly, J.

Present — Denman, P.J., Boomer, Pine, Lawton and Davis, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We reject defendant's contention that the evidence at trial was insufficient to establish that he had been driving while intoxicated. At trial, four police officers testified that defendant had the odor of alcohol on his breath, had slurred speech and had difficulty walking. In addition, the arresting officer testified that defendant twice failed in attempting to recite the alphabet. That uncontroverted testimony was sufficient to establish that defendant was "incapable of employing the physical and mental abilities which he is expected to possess in order to operate a vehicle as a reasonable and prudent driver" (People v Cruz, 48 N.Y.2d 419, 428, appeal dismissed 446 U.S. 901; see, People v DeBlase, 142 A.D.2d 926 ; People v Ottomanelli, 107 A.D.2d 212, 217, lv denied 66 N.Y.2d 617; see also, People v Le Beau, 134 A.D.2d 929).

We have examined defendant's other contention and find it to be without merit.


Summaries of

People v. Cole

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 26, 1991
178 A.D.2d 1016 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

People v. Cole

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JOHN F. COLE, SR.…

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

Date published: Dec 26, 1991

Citations

178 A.D.2d 1016 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Citing Cases

People v. Smith

Memorandum: Defendant was convicted of driving while intoxicated based upon the uncontroverted testimony of…

People v. Shank

Contrary to the contention of defendant, the fact that the officer had not observed anything improper in the…