Case Name: PEOPLE v. WINSTON
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1913-02-07
Citations: 139 N.Y.S. 1072
Docket Number: 
Parties: PEOPLE v. WINSTON.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 139
Pages: 1072–1072

Head Matter:
PEOPLE v. WINSTON.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.
February 7, 1913.)
Highways (§ 186 )—Offenses—Information—Motor Speeding.
An information which does not charge that defendant operated a motor vehicle at a speed in excess of 30 miles an hour “for a distance of one-fourth of a mile” charges no crime under Laws 1910, c. 374, § 287, limiting the speed of motor vehicles.
[Ed. Note.—For other eases, see Highways, Cent. Dig. §§ 476, 477; Dec. Dig. § 186.*]
Appeal from Westchester County Court.
John Winston was convicted of crime, and he appeals.
Reversed.
Argued before JENKS, P. J., and HIRSCHBERG. BURR. WOODWARD, and RICH, JJ.
J. Henry Esser, of Mt. Vernon, N. Y., for appellant.
Francis A. Winslow, Dist. Atty., of New York City, for the People.
For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes

Opinion:
WOODWARD, J.
The defendant was charged by an information with having "willfully, knowingly, and unlawfully" operated a motor vehicle, an automobile, "at a greater rate of speed than 30 miles an hour on said highway, in violation of and contrary to section 287, chapter 374, of Laws of 1910, constituting chapter 25 of the Consolidated Laws of New York as amended."
There is no charge that the defendant operated his automobile at a speed in excess of 30 miles an hour for a distance of one-fourth of a mile, and in the absence of such an allegation no crime is charged. Nor does the proof establish that the defendant in fact drove the car a distance of one-fourth of a mile in excess of 30 miles an hour. There was no violation of the statute, so far as the information or the testimony discloses, and it was error to hold that the conviction of the Court of Special Sessions was lawful.
The judgment of the County Court of Westchester County should be reversed, and the fine paid by the defendant should be remitted. All concur.