People v Massey (Dara)

[*1] People v Massey (Dara) 2010 NY Slip Op 52211(U) [29 Misc 3d 143(A)] Decided on December 15, 2010 Appellate Term, Second 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 This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 December 15, 2010
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
APPELLATE TERM: 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS
PRESENT: : NICOLAI, P.J., MOLIA and LaCAVA, JJ
2009-608 W CR.

The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

against

Dara Massey, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the City Court of Yonkers, Westchester County (Robert C. Cerrato, J.), rendered March 3, 2009. The judgment convicted defendant, after a nonjury trial, of disorderly conduct.

ORDERED that the judgment of conviction is reversed, on the law, the information is dismissed, and the fine, if paid, is remitted.

After a nonjury trial, the City Court found defendant guilty of disorderly conduct in violation of Penal Law § 240.20 (2) - (4), (6). A review of the record reveals that the information charging defendant with disorderly conduct is jurisdictionally defective. The factual portion of the information merely alleges that defendant "was verbally abusive and belligerent towards a caseworker in an interview area." The caseworker averred in
a supporting deposition that defendant "became verbally abusive and disruptive" and tried to follow him into a restricted area. Such allegations, without more, are conclusory and do not state facts of an evidentiary character tending to support the charge that defendant used abusive language (CPL 100.15 [3]; Penal Law § 240.20 [3]). Moreover, the information fails to allege any facts "tending to support the charges" (CPL 100.15 [3]) that defendant made unreasonable noise (Penal Law § 240.20 [2]), disturbed a "lawful assembly or meeting of persons" (Penal Law § 240.20 [4]), or "congregat[ed] with other persons" and "refus[ed] to comply with a lawful order of the police to disperse" (Penal Law § 240.20 [6]).

In view of the foregoing, the factual allegations in the information fail to allege "facts of an evidentiary character" (CPL 100.15 [3]) demonstrating "reasonable cause to believe that the defendant committed the offense charged" (CPL 100.40 [1] [b]; see People v Dreyden, 15 NY3d 100, 102-103 [2010]; People v Houston, NYLJ, Oct. 15, 1997, at 34, col 5 [App Term, 9th & [*2]10th Jud Dists]). Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is reversed and the information is dismissed.

In view of the foregoing, we pass on no other issue.

Nicolai, P.J., Molia and LaCava, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: December 15, 2010