Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
3Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Superceding Information in NY v. Premo

Superceding Information in NY v. Premo

Ratings: (0)|Views: 9,914|Likes:
Published by nicholasjpinto
The second complaint, or "superceding information," in the suit against Michael Premo, signed by Sgt. Richard Jones
The second complaint, or "superceding information," in the suit against Michael Premo, signed by Sgt. Richard Jones

More info:

Published by: nicholasjpinto on Mar 08, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

03/08/2013

pdf

text

original

 
a
CRIMINALCOURTOFTHECITYOF
NEWYORK
COUNTYOFNEWYORK
V
Page
1
of2
THEPEOPLE
OF
THE
STATEOF
NEW
YORK
MISDEMEANOR
-against-
1.
Michael
Premo
(M29)
ECAB
#
1295085
Defendant.Sergeant
Richard
Jones,shield04142
of
the
Patrol
Boro
Manhattan
South
Task
Force,states
as
follows:
On
December
17,
2011,
at
about
18:10
hours
near
the
corner
West
29th
Street
and
V
7thAvenue
in
theCounty
andState
of
New
York,
the
Defendantcommitted
theoffensesof:
1.
PL12O.00(2)
Assault
inthe
3rd
Degree-DNA-Eligible
MISD
V
(1
count)
2.
PL205.30
ResistingArrest
V
(1
count)
3.
PL240.20(5)Disorderly
Conduct
(1
count)the
defendantrecklessly
caused
physical
injury
to
another
person;
the
defendant
intentionallyattempted
to
prevent
apolice
officer
andpeace
officerfromeffectingan
authorized
arrest
of
himself
and
another
person;andthedefendant,
with
intent
tocause
public
inconvenience,
annoyance
andalarm
and
recklessly
creating
a
riskthereof,
obstructed
vehicular
and
pedestrian
traffic.
The
offenseswere
committedunder
the
following
circumstances:
Deponent
states
thatdeponent
observed
the
defendant
obstructingvehiculartraffic
by
walking
inthe
street
at
theabove-stated
location,
and
did
so
whiledisregarding
police
ordersto
stay
withinabarricaded
area.
Defendant’s
conduct
created
a
public
disturbance/inconvenience
in
that
it
caused
disruption
of
thenormal
flow
of
traffic.Deponentfurther
states
thatwhen
deponentwas
attempting
to
place
defendantunder
arrest,
defendant
twisted
defendant’sbody,
refused
to
place
defendant’s
handsbehind
defendantsback,
and
pushed
deponent
with
defendant’s
handsandbody,causing

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->