Legal Opinion

People v. Crant

New Rochelle City Court

Decided March 30, 1964PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFrank H. Connelly, J.

The defendant is accused of violating a local ordinance prescribing a vehicular speed limit of 25 miles per hour. Upon the trial, the prosecuting officer testified in substance that he followed the defendant’s vehicle in a police car and noted that his own speedometer read 42 miles per hour, while a constant distance was maintained between the two cars.

Proof of speeding, based solely upon the reading of an untested speedometer has been held to be legally insufficient (People v. Hey ser, 2 N Y 2d 390). To establish the accuracy of the speedometer, the People offered in evidence a card…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Palmer v. HoffmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
  2. United States v. Larry WareCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1957
  3. People v. NisonoffNew York Court of Appeals · 1944
  4. In re the Probate of the Will of CoddingtonNew York Court of Appeals · 1954
  5. United States v. MortimerCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1941

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Smith v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1984
  2. Coulter v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1973
  3. Porter v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1979
  4. State v. EcklundCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1981
  5. People v. Hoats, New York County Courts1980

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API