People v Fall (Boye)

[*1] People v Fall (Boye) 2014 NY Slip Op 51126(U) Decided on July 24, 2014 Appellate Term, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on July 24, 2014
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: Shulman, J.P., Hunter, Jr., Ling-Cohan, JJ.
570094/12

The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

against

Boye Fall, Defendant-Appellant.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Rita M. Mella, J.), rendered January 13, 2012, after a nonjury trial, convicting him of unlicensed general vending, and imposing sentence.

Per Curiam.

Judgment of conviction (Rita M. Mella, J.), rendered January 13, 2012, affirmed.

We find unavailing defendant's present challenge to the facial sufficiency of the accusatory instrument charging him with unlicensed general vending (see Administrative Code of City of New York § 29-453). The factual portion of the information detailed defendant's actions in "offer[ing] for sale" six handbags to "numerous people," and defendant has eschewed any argument that the facts set forth in the People's pleading did not adequately allege that defendant engaged in the conduct required for acting as a general vendor (see Administrative Code § 20-452[b]). Contrary to defendant's sole appellate contention, the sworn police allegation as to the location of the offense - that the episode took place "in front of 114 West 48 Street" in Manhattan - was sufficient for purposes of our threshold, pleading-stage inquiry to support a finding that defendant was acting in a "public space" (see Administrative Code § 20-452[d]; People v Dickie, 38 Misc 3d 127[A], 2012 NY Slip Op 53252[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2012], lv denied 21 NY3d 942 [2013]; see also People v Abdurraheem, 94 AD3d 569, 570 [2012], lv denied 19 NY3d 970 [2012]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

I concur I concur I concur
Decision Date: July 24, 2014