People v. Olivo (Elvis)
This text of 76 Misc. 3d 130(A) (People v. Olivo (Elvis)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
People v Olivo (2022 NY Slip Op 50878(U)) [*1]
| People v Olivo (Elvis) |
| 2022 NY Slip Op 50878(U) [76 Misc 3d 130(A)] |
| Decided on September 19, 2022 |
| 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| This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.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 19, 2022
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: Brigantti, J.P., Tisch, Michael, JJ.
570315/16
against
Elvis Olivo, Defendant-Appellant.
Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Lyle E. Frank, J.), rendered April 18, 2016, convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal trespass in the second degree, and imposing sentence.
Per Curiam.
Judgment of conviction (Lyle E. Frank, J.), rendered April 18, 2016, affirmed.
In view of defendant's knowing waiver of his right to be prosecuted by information, the accusatory instrument only had to satisfy the reasonable cause requirement of a misdemeanor complaint (see People v Dumay, 23 NY3d 518, 522 [2014]). So viewed, the accusatory instrument charging criminal trespass in the second degree was jurisdictionally valid because it described facts of an evidentiary nature establishing reasonable cause to believe that defendant "knowingly enter[ed] or remain[ed] unlawfully in a dwelling" (Penal Law § 140.15[1]). The instrument stated that defendant was observed "in the lobby ... beyond the vestibule" of a specified "apartment building where people reside," a location that is beyond a posted "No Trespassing" sign; that defendant told the police that he did not live at the building and that he was there to "buy dope"; and that defendant was not "an invited guest in that [he] was unable to provide the identity of a resident of whom he was an invited guest" (see People v Barnes, 26 NY3d 986, 989-990 [2015]; People v Richardson, 49 Misc 3d 139[A], 2015 NY Slip Op 51579[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2015], lv denied 26 NY3d 1111 [2016]).
All concur
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
Clerk of the CourtDecision Date: September 19, 2022
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
76 Misc. 3d 130(A), 2022 NY Slip Op 50878(U), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-olivo-elvis-nyappterm-2022.