Legal Opinion

People v. Fernandez

New York Court of Appeals

Decided October 25, 2012PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Chief Judge Lippman.

The issue presented by this appeal is whether the accusatory instrument was a facially sufficient simplified traffic information, although it was titled “Complaint/Information,” and contained factual information. For the reasons set forth below, we hold that the accusatory instrument was sufficient to serve as a simplified traffic information because it was substantially in the form prescribed by the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles.

On January 9, 2009, defendant was arrested and arraigned on charges of aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. People v. CaseyNew York Court of Appeals · 2000
  2. People v. DreydenNew York Court of Appeals · 2010
  3. People v. ConnorNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
  4. People v. VespucciNew York Court of Appeals · 1990
  5. People v. ChestnutNew York Court of Appeals · 2012

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. People v. DumayNew York Court of Appeals · 2014
  2. The People v. Frankie HattonNew York Court of Appeals · 2015
  3. People v. KearnsAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 2014
  4. People v. PerezCriminal Court of the City of New York · 2013
  5. People v. AzumanAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 2015

10 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