PEOPLE v. DiNONNO (1997)

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, New York,

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Laurel DiNONNO, Appellant.

Decided: March 05, 1997

Before DiPAOLA, P.J., and INGRASSIA and FLOYD, JJ.

William R. Biersack, Fishkill, for appellant. William V. Grady, Dist. Atty. of Dutchess County, Poughkeepsie (Kirsten A. Rappleyea, of counsel), for respondent.

Judgment of conviction unanimously affirmed.

Defendant's contention upon this appeal is that the court erred in admitting at a suppression hearing the results of field sobriety tests without a foundation to support their scientific accuracy (see, People v. Wesley, 83 N.Y.2d 417, 611 N.Y.S.2d 97, 633 N.E.2d 451). These tests however are not truly scientific in nature. Rather, they are based upon the indisputable fact that intoxication affects physical coordination and mental acuity and they are designed to enhance the ability of the officer who administers them to detect “unstable responses” (People v. Boudreau, 115 A.D.2d 652, 654, 496 N.Y.S.2d 489). Although their evaluation is necessarily to some extent subjective, so too are any of the ordinary indicia of intoxication and therefore this fact does not serve to preclude admissibility. Since the tests are not scientific in nature, proof of their acceptance in the scientific community is not required (see, Commonwealth v. Ragan, 438 Pa.Super. 505, 652 A.2d 925, app. denied 541 Pa. 650, 664 A.2d 540).

MEMORANDUM.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network