Legal Opinion
People v. Teatom
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided January 12, 2012PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRose, J.
Defendant contends that the evidence of his intoxication while operating his vehicle is legally insufficient because he did not become intoxicated until after the unwitnessed accident. We cannot agree. A witness who came upon defendant at the accident scene testified that defendant was staggering in the middle of the road while talking on his cell phone and, when the witness rolled down his window and said “it looks like you have been drinking,” defendant stated “well, I didn’t start drinking until after I crashed.” According to the witness, defendant had slurred speech, glossy eyes and…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- People v. PageNew York Court of Appeals · 1996
- People v. GajadharNew York Court of Appeals · 2007
- People v. CurkendallAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
- People v. OwensAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- People v. GarbuttAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- People v. ClarkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016
- People v. McDuffieAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- CLARK, JAQUAN, PEOPLE vAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016
- People v. ClarkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016