Legal Opinion
People v. Hochheimer
New York Supreme Court
Decided May 23, 1983PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
David O. Boehm, J.
The defendant moves to suppress the results of a breath test on a number of grounds. The principal conten*345tion raised is that the breathalyzer model used in this case (i.e., Smith and Wesson breathalyzer model 900A) is unreliable. This contention is based on the recent discovery that the instrument is susceptible to radio frequency interference. In addition, the defendant argues that the test results cannot be used in the prosecution for the Penal Law charges against him because his consent to submit to the breath test was not voluntary, and further,…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Schmerber v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Bumper v. North CarolinaSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- South Dakota v. NevilleSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- People v. GonzalezNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- People v. MolinaCriminal Court of the City of New York · 1983
- People v. Drumm, New York County Courts1984
- People v. Morse, New York County Courts1985
- People v. PantaleoCriminal Court of the City of New York · 1988
- People v. DillinCriminal Court of the City of New York · 1991
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.