Opinion
571151/15
05-12-2022
The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Angel Ferrer, Defendant-Appellant.
Unpublished Opinion
Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Abena Darkeh, J. at plea, Steven M. Statsinger, J. at sentencing), rendered September 10, 2015, convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal contempt in the second degree, and imposing sentence.
PRESENT: Brigantti, J.P., Hagler, Michael, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Judgment of conviction (Abena Darkeh, J. at plea, Steven M. Statsinger, J. at sentencing), rendered September 10, 2015, affirmed.
Since defendant waived prosecution by information, the accusatory instrument is assessed under the reasonable cause standard applicable to a misdemeanor complaint (see People v Dumay, 23 N.Y.3d 518, 522 [2014]). So viewed, the instrument was jurisdictionally valid because it described facts of an evidentiary nature establishing reasonable cause to believe that defendant was guilty of criminal contempt in the second degree (see Penal Law § 215.50[3]). The instrument alleges that on November 12, 2014, defendant signed a five-year order of protection "in court" that directed him to "stay away" from Emilia Ribot. The instrument further alleges that on three subsequent dates - May 14, 2015, May 21, 2015 and June 3, 2015 - defendant intentionally disobeyed the order when he went to Ribot's apartment and "banged on her door for five minutes" while "cursing and screaming to be let inside" (see People v Salazar, 290 A.D.2d 256 [2002], lv denied 97 N.Y.2d 760 [2002]). These factual allegations are sufficient to particularize the crime charged and protect against a constitutional double jeopardy violation (see People v Kaplan, 125 A.D.3d 465 [2015], lv denied 25 N.Y.3d 1203 [2015]; People v Ellison, 106 A.D.3d 419 [2013], lv denied 21 N.Y.3d 1004 [2013]). Any further challenges to the validity of the order of protection were "matter[s] to be raised as a defense to the contempt charge, not by insistence that this [accusatory instrument] was jurisdictionally defective" (People v Konieczny, 2 N.Y.3d 569, 577 [2004][internal quotation marks and alterations omitted]).
Our previous affirmance of the conviction that resulted in the issuance of the order of protection (see People v Ferrer, 73 Misc.3d 148 [A], 2022 NY Slip Op 50007[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2022], lv denied 38N.Y.3d950[2022]), renders defendant's remaining argument academic.
All concur