From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Shine

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 20, 1996
224 A.D.2d 306 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

February 20, 1996

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Nicholas Figueroa, J.).


Evidence that defendant lacked a driver's license was properly admitted as relevant to whether defendant was authorized to use the stolen car in which the police found him, it being highly unlikely that a person unable to produce a license or registration would have authorization to use a car ( see, People v. Santarelli, 49 N.Y.2d 241, 247-248). Nor is there merit to defendant's claim that the court should have charged temporary and lawful possession and justification. Assuming, arguendo, that the far-fetched scenario defendant argues as a reasonable view of the evidence — that he entered the car to keep warm and was attempting, when arrested, to move it to a safer place near the curb — such conduct was neither "temporary and lawful" nor "justified" as an "emergency measure" (Penal Law § 35.05).

Concur — Milonas, J.P., Rosenberger, Rubin, Kupferman and Mazzarelli, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Shine

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 20, 1996
224 A.D.2d 306 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

People v. Shine

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. THOMAS SHINE, Appellant

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

Date published: Feb 20, 1996

Citations

224 A.D.2d 306 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
638 N.Y.S.2d 437

Citing Cases

People v. Francis

As an alternative holding, we reject it on the merits. Assuming, arguendo, that the scenario alleged by…