PEOPLE v. KONG (2021)

Judgment of conviction (James G. Clynes, J.), rendered June 13, 2019, affirmed.

In view of defendant's knowing waiver of the right to prosecution by information, the accusatory instrument only had to satisfy the reasonable cause requirement (see People v Dumay, 23 NY3d 518, 522 [2014]). So viewed, the accusatory instrument was jurisdictionally valid, since it established reasonable cause to believe that defendant was guilty of possessing synthetic phenethylamines and synthetic cannabinoids (see 10 NYCRR 9.2, renumbered to 9-1.2), the charge to which he ultimately pleaded guilty. Contrary to defendant's primary contention on appeal, the complaint “supplied the basis” (see People v Smalls, 26 NY3d 1064, 1067 [2015], quoting People v Kalin, 12 NY3d 225, 231 [2009]) for the arresting officer's contention that the substance recovered from defendant's pants pocket and the ground in front of him was synthetic cannabinoids/synthetic phenylamine (“K2”). The instrument recited that the officer had the requisite training and experience in identifying drugs, and that he reached his conclusion about the nature of the substance based on its appearance and odor, as well as defendant's statement to the effect that “it's K2” (see People v Kalin, 12 NY3d at 231-232; People v Rodriguez, 54 Misc 3d 129[A], 2016 NY Slip Op 51826[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2016], lv denied 29 NY3d 952 [2017]). No additional evidentiary details were required for the People's pleading to provide adequate notice to enable defendant to prepare a defense and invoke his protection against double jeopardy (see People v Kasse, 11 NY3d 1142, 1143 [2014]; see also People v Thiam, 34 NY3d 1040 [2019, DiFiore, Ch. J., concurring]).

Per Curiam.

All concur