Legal Opinion

People v. Meath

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided September 29, 1995PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621), is sufficient to support defendant’s conviction of obstructing governmental administration in the second degree (Penal Law § 195.05). Defendant’s "acts constituted a knowing, physical interference with and disruption of the official function * * * being performed by [the officer]” (People v Tarver, 188 AD2d 938, lv denied 81 NY2d 893; see, People v Case, 42 NY2d 98, 102; People v Ravizee, 146 Misc 2d 679, 682-683).

We have examined defendant’s…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. People v. ContesNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
  2. People v. CaseNew York Court of Appeals · 1977
  3. People v. TarverAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
  4. People v. RavizeeCriminal Court of the City of New York · 1990

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. In re Michael C.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999
  2. People v. GaryAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API