 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
1
.
OPINION
|
EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
SUPPRESSION APPELLATE TERM DEFENDANT CPL ARREST AUTHORIZES LAW MEMORANDUM JUDGE CHEMICAL TEST SUBDIVISION RESPONDENT OFFICER CRIMINAL COURT PURSUANT APPLICABLE LAW STATUTORY LIMITATION LANGUAGE ONE-SIDED APPEAL LIMITATION PERMITS SUPPRESSION COURT-ORDERED CHEMICAL TESTS APPEAL OPTIONS INCORPORATE RESTRICTION DEFENDANT COURT IMPOSE SUPPORT FIRST DEPARTMENT CHIEF JUDGE KAYE |
PEOPLE, & C.,APPELLANT, v. REINALDO AYALA, RESPONDENT.
89 N.Y.2d 874, 675 N.E.2d 846, 653 N.Y.S.2d 92 (1996)
December 18, 1996
AppT No. 274 (1996 NY Int. 243)
Decided December 18, 1996
_________________________________________________________________
This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before
publication in the New York Reports.
Stephen Muller, for Appellant.
Andrew C. Fine, for Respondent.
MEMORANDUM:
The order of the Appellate Term should be reversed and the matter
remitted to that court for consideration of the People's appeal.
Defendant was arrested and charged with driving while intoxicated. The
arresting officer testified at the suppression hearing that defendant
agreed to take a breathalyzer test, after admitting to having had "a
few beers." The officer added that the test was administered
approximately two and one-half hours after the arrest. Defendant had
moved to suppress the results of the test on the ground that it was
administered more than two hours after arrest. Criminal Court granted
the motion. The Appellate Term dismissed the People's appeal as not
authorized, and a Judge of this Court granted the People leave to
appeal.
The sole issue is whether a People's appeal to an intermediate
appellate court is authorized to challenge a trial court ruling
suppressing the results of a consented-to chemical test. CPL 450.20(8)
provides an as-of-right appeal to the People from a criminal court
"order suppressing evidence, entered before trial pursuant to section
710.20." Subdivision 5 of CPL 710.20 authorizes suppression of results
of chemical blood test "administered in violation of the provisions of
subdivision three of section eleven hundred ninety-four of the vehicle
and traffic law, subdivision eight of section forty-nine-a of the
navigation law or any other applicable law" (emphasis added).
Defendant urges a statutorily construed limitation only on the
People's right to appeal from certain orders granting suppression. We
find the argument unpersuasive, because the plain language of CPL
710.20(5) does not contain, import or justify any such one-sided
appeal limitation. Since it permits suppression not only of
SNIPPETS:
|
|
|
| | | |
|
|
