Opinion
5689.
Decided on October 13, 2011.
Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (David Stadtmauer, J.), rendered February 11, 2009, convicting defendant, after a nonjury trial, of criminal trespass in the third degree, and sentencing him to a conditional discharge and a $150 fine, unanimously affirmed.
Steven Banks, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Ellen Dille of counsel), for appellant.
Robert T. Johnson, District Attorney, Bronx (Hannah E.C. Moore of counsel), for respondent.
Gonzalez, P.J., Andrias, Saxe, Sweeny, JJ.
The misdemeanor information sufficiently alleged that defendant knowingly and unlawfully entered a nonpublic area of a building. There is no material distinction between the allegations of this information and those upheld in People v Maresca ( 19 Misc 3d 133[A], 2008 NY Slip Op 50663[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2008]) and People v Quinones (2002 NY Slip Op 50091[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2002], lv denied 98 NY2d 680). The allegations plainly indicate that defendant entered a nonpublic lobby, and not merely a public vestibule. The factual allegations of an information are to be "given a fair and not overly restrictive or technical reading," and are sufficient so long as they "give an accused notice sufficient to prepare a defense and are adequately detailed to prevent a defendant from being tried twice for the same offense" ( People v Casey, 95 NY2d 353, 360).
The information was also sufficient to allege that defendant knowingly entered the lobby unlawfully. The allegations that defendant entered the lobby through a locked door, notwithstanding a conspicuous no-trespassing sign, and when questioned did not claim to be a resident or invited guest, satisfied the knowledge element of trespass ( see e.g. People v Flores , 21 Misc 3d 141 [A], 2008 NY Slip Op 52371[U] [App Term 2d Dept 2008]).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.