People v Aguilar (William)

[*1] People v Aguilar (William) 2017 NY Slip Op 51161(U) Decided on September 15, 2017 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 September 15, 2017
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: Shulman, J.P., Ling-Cohan, Gonzalez, JJ.
570808/14

The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

against

William Aguilar, Defendant-Appellant.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Ann E. Scherzer, J.), rendered July 2, 2014, convicting him, upon a plea of guilty, of driving while impaired, and imposing sentence.

Per Curiam.

Judgment of conviction (Ann E. Scherzer, J.), rendered July 2, 2014, affirmed.

The accusatory instrument was not jurisdictionally defective. Giving the misdemeanor information "a fair and not overly restrictive or technical reading" (People v Casey, 95 NY2d 354, 360 [2000]), we find "as a matter of common sense and reasonable pleading" (People v Davis, 13 NY3d 17, 31 [2009]) that it was legally sufficient to charge defendant with driving while impaired (see Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192(1). The arresting officer alleged that defendant operated a motor vehicle; that he had bloodshot and watery eyes, slurred speech, and the odor of alcoholic beverages on his breath; that there was an open bottle of beer in the front console of the car; and that defendant refused to submit to a breath test (see People v Cruz, 48 NY2d 419, 426-427 [1979], appeal dismissed 466 US 901 [1980]; People v Taylor, 104 AD3d 603, 604 [2013], lv denied 21 NY3d 947 [2013]; People v McDonald, 27 AD3d 949 [2006]). There was no requirement that the information also contain an allegation of erratic driving (see generally People v Fiumara, 116 AD3d 421 [2014], lv denied 23 NY3d 1036 [2014]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

I concur I concur I concur
Decision Date: September 15, 2017