People v. Hall

Dec 13, 1979
Reporters:
, , ,

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the County Court should be reversed and the information dismissed.

It is a fundamental and nonwaivable ‍​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌​​​‌​‌​​​​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​​​‌​​​​​​‌​‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌​‌​‌​‌​​​​​​​​​​‌​‌​‌​​‌‌‍jurisdictional prerequisite that an information state the crime with which the defendant is charged and the particular facts constituting that crime (People v Case, 42 NY2d 98, 99; People v Harper, 37 NY2d 96, 99; People v McGuire, 5 NY2d 523, 525). In order for an ‍​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌​​​‌​‌​​​​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​​​‌​​​​​​‌​‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌​‌​‌​‌​​​​​​​​​​‌​‌​‌​​‌‌‍information to be sufficient on its face, every element of the offense charged and the defendant’s commission thereof must be alleged (CPL 100.40, subd 1, par [c]; 100.15, subd 3).

Here the information charging harassment recited only that defendant, who it also ‍​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌​​​‌​‌​​​​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​​​‌​​​​​​‌​‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌​‌​‌​‌​​​​​​​​​​‌​‌​‌​​‌‌‍alleges indicated that his desire was that the complainant leave the defendant’s premises, “did strike, shove and otherwise subject [the complainant] to physi*928cal contact and threatened * * * physical harm.” It failed to specify an essential element of the crime, ‍​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌​​​‌​‌​​​​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​​​‌​​​​​​‌​‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌​‌​‌​‌​​​​​​​​​​‌​‌​‌​​‌‌‍which is that the acts be done “with intent to harass, annoy or alarm” (Penal Law, § 240.25). Absent such an allegation, the acts complained of did not constitute criminal conduct and, hence, defendant’s conviction was jurisdictionally defective (see People v Case, ‍​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌​​​‌​‌​​​​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​​​‌​​​​​​‌​‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌​‌​‌​‌​​​​​​​​​​‌​‌​‌​​‌‌‍supra; People v McGuire, supra).

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur in memorandum.

Order reversed, etc.