People v. Fields

• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
• Writing for the Court: CASEY
• Citation: People v. Fields, 617 N.Y.S.2d 583, 208 A.D.2d 1050 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
• Decision Date: 20 October 1994
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Frederick FIELDS, Appellant.

Page 583

617 N.Y.S.2d 583

208 A.D.2d 1050

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Frederick FIELDS, Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division Third Department.

Oct. 20, 1994.

Martin Cirincione, Public Defender, Schenectady, for appellant.

Robert M. Carney, Dist. Atty. (Alfred D. Chapleau, of counsel), Schenectady, for respondent.

Before CARDONA, P.J., and WHITE, CASEY and PETERS, JJ.

CASEY, Justice.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Schenectady County (Harrigan, J.), rendered December 14, 1992, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree.

After waiving indictment, defendant entered a plea of guilty to the single charge of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree contained in a superior court information which alleged that at a certain time and place defendant possessed a firearm in violation of Penal Law § 265.02(1). On appeal, defendant contends that the superior court information was jurisdictionally defective due to the absence of an allegation that the firearm was operable. A superior court information is subject to the same rules as an indictment (CPL 200.15). Using the language of the statute which defines the crime of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, the instrument at issue alleged where, when and what defendant did and, therefore, notified defendant of the crime of which he stood accused (see, People v. Iannone, 45 N.Y.2d 589, 598-599, 412 N.Y.S.2d 110, 384 N.E.2d 656). We are of the view that defendant's objection is, at most, related to the...