Wrongly Convicted Database Record

 

Go to Database Search Page

Go to  Database Index Page

Linda Ingber

 

Charge:

Driving while texting or talking on electronic device

Sentence:

$200 fine

Years Imprisoned:

Year Crime:

2014

Year Convicted:

2015

Year Cleared:

2017

U.S. State or Country of Crime:

New York

County or Region of Crime:

Nassau

City of Crime:

Lake Success

Result:

Judicially Exonerated

Summary of Case:

"Linda Ingber was wrongly convicted On February 11, 2015 of using a portable electronic device while operating a motor vehicle.in the Village of Lake Success, New York. Ingber's prosecution was based on a police officer observing her holding an electronic device in her hand 12 inches from her mouth and speaking into the device. Ingber admitted she was driving while dictating using an Olympus model DS-25A recorder. Her defense was that using such a dedicated dictating device while driving is not covered under Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1225-d. The Justice Court judge ruled that it was covered in the laws ""catchall" provision of the definition of a "portable electronic device," i.e., "any other electronic device when used to input, write, send, receive, or read text for present or future communication" (Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1225-d [2] [a])" After her conviction by Judge Mark D. Mermel following a bench trial, Ingber was fined $200. Ingber appealed. On November 30, 2017 the New York Supreme Court Appellate Term, Second Department, 9th & 10th Judicial Districts set aside Ingber's conviction and acquitted her on the basis her conduct did not fall within NYS VTL §1225-d Definition of PED or Catchall. The Court's ruling stated: "As we read the catchall provision, the word "text" is the object of the verbs, "to input, write, send, receive, or read." Here, however, there was no evidence presented by the People that the device that defendant had been seen holding and talking into while driving displayed, sent or received text. ... Thus, the evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the People ... was not legally sufficient to support the conviction." [People v. Linda Ingber, 2017 NY Slip Op 27402 (NY Supreme Ct: App Term, Second Dept, 9th & 10th Jud Dist, 11-30-2017)"

Conviction Caused By:

Innocence Proved By:

"On November 30, 2017 the New York Supreme Court Appellate Term, Second Department, 9th & 10th Judicial Districts set aside Ingber's conviction and acquitted her on the basis her conduct did not fall within NYS VTL §1225-d Definition of PED or Catchall."

Defendant Aided By:

Compensation Awarded:

Was Perpetrator Identified?

Age When Imprisoned:

Age When Released:

Sex:

Female

Skin/Ethnicity:

Information Source 1:

"People v. Linda Ingber, 2017 NY Slip Op 27402, No. 2015-2592NCR (NY Supreme Court: Appellate Term, Second Department, 9th & 10th Judicial Districts, 11-30-2017) (Setting aside conviction and ordering her acquittal)"

Information Location 1:

https://www.leagle.com/decision/innyco20171207415

Information Source 2:

Information Location 2:

Information Source 3:

Information Location 3:

Information Source 4:

Information Location 4:

Information Source 5:

Information Location 5:

Book About Case:

Book Information:

Book About Case (2):

Book Information (2):

Movie About Case:

Comments About Case:

Innocents Database Created and Maintained by Hans Sherrer innocents@forejustice.org

Hosted on forejustice.org and mirrored on justicedenied.org .