PEOPLE v. GOTTWALD (2020)

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, New York,

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Kurt GOTTWALD, Defendant-Appellant.

570047 /12

Decided: September 25, 2020

PRESENT: Edmead, P.J., Cooper, Higgitt, JJ.

Judgment of conviction (Robert M. Mandelbaum, J.), rendered January 3, 2012, affirmed.

The misdemeanor information charging defendant with driving while impaired (see Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192[1]) was not jurisdictionally defective. The arresting officer alleged that, on a specified date, time and street location, defendant operated a 2003 Honda motor vehicle, had bloodshot and watery eyes, the odor of alcohol on his breath, was unsteady on his feet and refused to submit to a breath test (see People v. Fiumara, 116 AD3d 421 [2014], lv denied 23 NY3d 1036 [2014]; People v. Lawrence, 53 Misc 3d 137[A], 2016 NY Slip Op 51469[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2016], lv denied 28 NY3d 1147 [2017]; see also People v. Taylor, 104 AD3d 603, 604 [2013], lv denied 21 NY2d 947 [2013]). These allegations gave defendant sufficient notice to prepare a defense and had detail adequate to prevent him from being tried twice for the same offense (see People v. Kalin, 12 NY3d 225 [2009]). There was no requirement that the information also contain an allegation of erratic driving (see People v. Fiumara, 116 AD3d at 421).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

Per Curiam.

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Out of date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