Citation Numbers: 6 Misc. 3d 30, 789 NYS2d 797, 789 N.Y.S.2d 797, 2004 NY Slip Op 24401, 2004 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1858
Filed Date: 10/22/2004
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/19/2024
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
Defendant was charged with driving a vehicle which had excessively tinted side windows (see Vehicle and Traffic Law § 375 [12-a] [b]). At trial, the officer testified that he estimated that the windows only permitted about 15% light transmittance. Although such a percentage of light transmittance is below the legal threshold (id.), the officer did not establish that he possessed any experience in visually determining the amount of light transmitted through a window, or some other satisfactory reason or basis, such as a “tint-meter,” for his opinion. As a result, the evidence was legally insufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (cf. People v Olsen, 22 NY2d 230 [1968]). Although defendant did not properly preserve his objection to the sufficiency of the evidence, we nevertheless review it in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction (see CPL 470.15 [6] [a]).
Consequently, we do not pass on defendant’s remaining contentions.
McCabe, P.J., Rudolph and Angiolillo, JJ., concur.