Opinion
570020/03.
Decided April 23, 2004.
The People appeal from an order of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, Bronx County, dated November 14, 2002 (Eugene Oliver, Jr., J.) granting defendant's motion to dismiss the accusatory instrument.
Order dated November 14, 2002 (Eugene Oliver, Jr., J.) reversed, on the law and the facts, motion to dismiss denied, accusatory instrument reinstated, and matter remanded for further proceedings.
PRESENT: HON. LUCINDO SUAREZ, P.J., HON. WILLIAM P. McCOOE, HON. PHYLLIS GANGEL-JACOB, Justices.
"[G]iven a fair and not overly restrictive or technical reading" ( People v. Casey, 95 NY2d 354, 360), the allegations of the superseding information — including the fire inspector's sworn account of the events surrounding his inspections of the building premises and the defendant's admission concerning her ownership interest in the named "commercial establishment" located therein — sufficiently set forth the factual basis for the alleged Fire Code violations ( see, Administrative Code of City of NY, § 27-4190). Any issues relating to the defendant's connection to or control over the building premises are factual matters appropriately left for trial ( see, People v. Saito, 149 Misc 2d 342, 344). To the extent that defendant's motion papers can be read as seeking dismissal of the information in the interest of justice, the current record reflects no "compelling factor" clearly demonstrating that conviction or prosecution of the defendant would result in injustice ( see, CPL 170.40; 210.40[1]; People v. Dunlap, 216 AD2d 215; People v. Saito, 149 Misc 2d at 344-345).