Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

State v. Davis

New York Court of Appeals
13 N.Y.3d 17 (2009)


Facts

On December 15, 2005, a police officer observed Wayne Davis (defendant) in Betsy Head Park in Brooklyn, New York, at 2:06 a.m. A sign posted in the park stated the park closed at 9 p.m. A New York City Parks Department (Parks Department) rule prohibited individuals from being in city parks after the posted closing time. Violation of this rule was a Class B misdemeanor with a maximum punishment of ninety days’ imprisonment and a $1,000 fine. On February 16, 2006, the State of New York (plaintiff) arraigned Davis for violating the Parks Department rule and Davis pled not guilty. Davis consented to his case being referred to a judicial hearing officer (JHO) for trial, final disposition, and sentencing. New York Criminal Procedure Law § 350.20 allowed JHOs, who were retired judges, to hear Class B criminal cases in order to alleviate backlog and delay in the criminal courts. A JHO exercised the same powers as a New York City Criminal Court judge, and a JHO’s decision was subject to appeal in the same manner as a decision of a Criminal Court judge. JHOs were employed only on consent of the parties, and defendants retained the right to have their case adjudicated by a Criminal Court judge. A JHO convicted Davis of violating the Parks Department rule and sentenced Davis with a $75 fine or up to ten days in jail. The sentence was later changed to time served. Davis appealed the conviction, challenging the constitutionality of § 350.20 on the ground that it violated the New York Constitution. The Appellate Term affirmed. The New York Court of Appeal granted Davis leave to appeal.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Ciparick, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 221,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.