Opinion
2009-2543 N CR.
Decided June 17, 2011.
Appeal from a judgment of the Justice Court of the Village of Port Washington North, Nassau County (Sheldon M. Greenbaum, J.), rendered November 17, 2009. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of violating a stop work order.
ORDERED that the judgment of conviction is reversed, on the law, the summons is dismissed, and the fine is remitted.
PRESENT: TANENBAUM, J.P., MOLIA and IANNACCI, JJ.
Defendant was charged in a summons dated July 6, 2009 with the offenses of construction without a permit (Code of the Village of Port Washington North § 68-5) and violating a stop work order (Code of the Village of Port Washington North § 68-11). The summons was accompanied by an "order to remedy violation" and a "revocation of building permit" notice; all three documents were unsworn and signed by "Robert Barbach, AIA Building Inspector." Subsequently, on September 15, 2009, defendant appeared with counsel, and pleaded guilty to the charge of noncompliance with a stop work order in satisfaction of both charges. The Justice Court sentenced defendant to a fine of $5,000.
To confer jurisdiction upon the Justice Court, the People were required to file a legally sufficient accusatory instrument ( see People v Devany , 24 Misc 3d 130 [A], 2009 NY Slip Op 51345[U] [App Term, 9th 10th Jud Dists 2009]; People v Weinberg, 146 Misc2d 441 [App Term, 9th 10th Jud Dists 1990]). A summons is not an accusatory instrument, but serves merely to compel a defendant's appearance for purposes of arraignment on a properly filed accusatory instrument, and does not confer jurisdiction over the defendant ( see CPL 150.10, 150.20; People v Devany , 24 Misc 3d 130 [A], 2009 NY Slip Op 51345[U]; People v Peak Carting , 11 Misc 3d 4 [App Term, 9th 10th Jud Dists 2005]). The other documents which were issued with the summons — the "order to remedy violation" and "revocation of building permit" notices — were not verified in a manner permitted by CPL 100.30 and thus could not be deemed sufficient accusatory instruments ( see People v Smith , 22 Misc 3d 131 [A], 2009 NY Slip Op 50166[U] [App Term, 9th 10th Jud Dists 2009]). This court has consistently held that, after the issuance of an appearance ticket, the failure to file with the court a proper accusatory instrument, mandates the reversal of any resulting judgment of conviction and the dismissal of the summons ( see People v Peak Carting , 11 Misc 3d 4 ; People v McKee, NYLJ, Mar. 3, 1997, at 30, col 4 [App Term, 9th 10th Jud Dists]; People v Alberi, NYLJ, Feb. 7, 1990, at 26, col 2 [App Term, 9th 10th Jud Dists]; People v Cooperman, NYLJ, Jan. 17, 1989, at 26, col 4 [App Term, 9th 10th Jud Dists]).
Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is reversed, the summons is dismissed, and the fine is remitted.
Tanenbaum, J.P., Molia and Iannacci, JJ., concur.