Majority
The conviction, insofar as based upon violation of subdivision 5 of section 240.20 of the Penal Law was, as conceded by the District Attorney, error (see People v. Kranish, N. Y. L. J., March 18,1970, p. 2, col. 4 [App. Term, 1st Dept.]), for there was no proof defendants did anything more than demonstrate in the area prescribed therefor by the pólice.
We find no error, however, in the ruling below that, with intent to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or
Judgment of conviction of violation of subdivision 5 of section
240.20 of the Penal Law reversed on the law and the facts and the complaint, insofar as it asserts such violations, dismissed.
Judgment of conviction of violation of subdivision 7 of section 240.20 of the Penal Law affirmed.
Concur — Quinn, J. P., Gold and Markowitz, JJ.
Cases cited
- People v. Todaro 26 N Y 2d 325 at 329 p. 708
- People v. Radich 26 N Y 2d 114 at 118-120 p. 708
- Street v. New York 394 U. S. 576 p. 708
- People v. Street 20 N Y 2d 231 p. 708
- United States v. O'Brien 391 U. S. 367 p. 708