Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta People v. Canner 88 Misc. 2d 85

← Cases

People v. Canner

88 Misc. 2d 85 Court Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department, Decision date 1975-06-10 English

Contents

Majority

p. 85
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Thomas Canner, Appellant.
Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department,
June 10, 1975
Abraham Schatzman for appellant. Eugene Gold, District Attorney (Steven Di Joseph of counsel), for respondent.

Memorandum. Judgment of conviction unanimously reversed on the law, complaint dismissed and fine remitted.

Defendant’s conduct did not rise to the level required by the statute, since the disturbance complained of was not public, but private in nature (see Penal Law, § 240.20; People v Chesnick, 302 NY 58 ; People v Hill, 60 Misc 2d 277 ; People v Reid, 180 Misc 289 ). While it is true that the offense of disorderly conduct can be committed inside an apartment

p. 86
house (People v Chesnick supra), only the occupants of the two apartments complained of the noise.

Concur: Groat, P. J., Pino and Rinaldi, JJ.

Cases cited