History
  • No items yet
midpage
People v. Beltrand
67 Misc. 2d 324
N.Y. App. Term.
1971
Check Treatment
Per Curiam.

There was no proof, on the preliminary hearing, of loitering by defendant for any appreciable period of time. Hence, the testimony was insufficient factually to establish the conjunctive elements of subdivision 6 of section 240.35 of the Penal Law. It is therefore unnecessary to deal with defendant’s argument that the statute is unconstitutional (People v. Schanbarger, 24 N Y 2d 288; Rescue Army v. Municipal Ct., 331 U. S. 549, 569).

The order should be affirmed.

Concur — Lupiaho, J. P., Markowitz and Gold, JJ.

Order affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: People v. Beltrand
Court Name: Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
Date Published: Jul 8, 1971
Citation: 67 Misc. 2d 324
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Term.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.