People v. Marzulli
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
1Opinion of the Court
memorandum by the court.
In our opinion, the proof was insufficient to establish that the defendant “ operated ” the vehicle within the meaning of former subdivision 2 of section 1192 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law. The evidence tends to show, we believe, that the movement of the car was unintentionally caused by this defendant who was seated in the passenger seat at the time of the accident. An act may be criminal without intent or knowledge, but an involuntary act is not criminal (People v. Shaughnessy, 66 Misc 2d 19; Hornstein v. Paramount Pictures, 22 Misc 2d 996, affd. 266 App. Div. 659,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hornstein v. Paramount Pictures, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1944
- Hornstein v. Paramount Pictures, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1942
- People v. ShaughnessyNew York District Court · 1971
3Cited by7 opinions
- People v. LindslyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- People v. MarottiAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 2008
- People v. LevyAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 2011
- People v. LewisCriminal Court of the City of New York · 1994
- People v. Mullady, New York County Courts1991
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.