Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, v. STEPHEN R. BOMBARD, DEFENDANT–APPELLANT.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, following a jury trial, of driving while intoxicated (Vehicle and Traffic Law §§ 1192 [3]; 1193[1][c][i] ). Defendant was sentenced to an indeterminate prison term of 11/313 to 4 years and ordered to pay a fine in the amount of $2,000. Viewing the evidence in light of the elements of the crime as charged to the jury (see People v. Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 349), we conclude that the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see generally People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495).
Defendant failed to preserve for our review his contentions that County Court erred in admitting evidence of his refusal to submit to a breathalyzer test and in instructing the jury that an adverse inference could be drawn from his refusal (see People v. Kithcart, 85 AD3d 1558, 1559, lv denied 17 NY3d 818; see generally CPL 470.05[2] ). In any event, defendant's contentions lack merit. “To establish a refusal, the People must show that the failure to register a sample is the result of defendant's action and not of the machine's inability to register the sample” (People v. Adler, 145 A.D.2d 943, 944, lv denied 73 N.Y.2d 919; see People v. Bratcher, 165 A.D.2d 906, 907, lv denied 77 N.Y.2d 958; Matter of Van Sickle v. Melton, 64 A.D.2d 846, 846; see generally Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1194[2][f] ), and we conclude that the People met that burden here. The People also were therefore entitled to an adverse inference charge based on defendant's refusal (see People v. Thomas, 46 N.Y.2d 100, 110, appeal dismissed 444 U.S. 891; CJI2d[NY] Vehicle & Traffic Law § 1192[3] ).
Finally, we reject defendant's contention that the sentence is unduly harsh and severe, particularly in view of defendant's history of convictions of driving while intoxicated.
Frances E. Cafarell
Clerk of the Court
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: KA 14–01519
Decided: October 07, 2016
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)