PEOPLE v. SANCHEZ (2021)

Judgment of conviction (Kevin McGrath, J.), rendered October 18, 2016, affirmed.

Since defendant waived the right to be prosecuted by information, the facial sufficiency of the accusatory instrument must be assessed under the standard required of a misdemeanor complaint (see People v Dumay, 23 NY3d 518 [2014]). So viewed, the accusatory instrument was not jurisdictionally defective because it described facts of an evidentiary nature establishing reasonable cause to believe that defendant was guilty of third-degree aggravated unlicensed driving (see Vehicle and Traffic Law § 511[1][a]). The instrument, including a certified abstract of defendant's driving record, alleged that defendant operated a motor vehicle on December 16, 2015 while his license was revoked because of a September 19, 2014 “DWI conviction”; and that defendant knew his license was revoked because the revocation order was sent to his last known address and informed him that his license would not be reinstated until he satisfied certain requirements, including payment of a $25 “suspension termination fee” (see People v Abutiate, 59 Misc 3d 127[A], 2018 NY Slip Op 50372[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2018], lv denied 31 NY3d 1077 [2018]; People v Gerado, 55 Misc 3d 127[A], 2017 NY Slip Op 50344[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2017], lv denied 29 NY3d 1079 [2017]; People v Thompson, 52 Misc 3d 145[A], 2016 NY Slip Op 51287[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2016], lv denied 28 NY3d 1076 [2016]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

Per Curiam.

All concur