PEOPLE v. TERRERO (2021)

Judgment of conviction (Angela J. Badamo, J.), rendered September 6, 2018, affirmed.

Since defendant waived prosecution 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 was jurisdictionally valid because it described facts of an evidentiary nature establishing reasonable cause to believe that defendant was guilty of possessing a controlled substance, to wit, crack cocaine (see Penal Law § 220.03). The instrument recited that police recovered a “pipe containing crack/cocaine residue from the defendant's right pants pocket” and that the officer believed the substance to be crack/cocaine “based on [his] professional training as a police officer in the identification of drugs, [his] prior experience as a police officer making drug arrests, the odor emanating from the substance, and [his] observation of the packaging which is characteristic of crack/cocaine residue” (see People v Smalls, 26 NY3d 1064 [2015]; People v Kalin, 12 NY3d 225 [2009]; People v Pearson, 78 AD3d 445 [2010], lv denied 16 NY3d 799 [2011]). Contrary to defendant's contention, a laboratory report was not required to accompany the accusatory instrument for it to be facially sufficient (see People v Kalin, 12 NY3d at 231; People v Pearson, 78 AD3d at 445).

Per Curiam.

All concur.