The People appeal from an order of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, Bronx County, August 10, 2004 (Harold Adler, J.) which dismissed the accusatory instrument for facial insufficiency.

PER CURIAM:

Order dated August 10, 2004 (Harold Adler, J.) reversed, on the law, accusatory instrument reinstated and matter remanded to Criminal Court for further proceedings.

The misdemeanor complaint and supporting deposition sufficiently set forth the factual basis for the charge of criminal trespass in the second degree (Penal Law § 140.15) by alleging, inter alia, that defendant was observed at around midnight inside the lobby of an apartment building equipped with a locked entrance door and "buzzer system"; that defendant acknowledged that he lived elsewhere, and although stating that he was in the building to visit an individual identified only as "Eddie," was unable to identify Eddie's apartment number; and that no person named Eddie was listed on the building's tenant roster. Contrary to the view expressed below, these allegations were sufficient, for pleading purposes, to establish the "knowingly enters or remains unlawfully" element of the charged offense (see People v Babarcich, 166 AD2d 655 [*2][1990], lv denied 76 NY2d 1019 [1990]; People v Quinones, 2002 NY Slip Op 50091[U], lv denied 98 NY2d 680 [2002]).

This constitutes the decision and order of the Court.
Decision Date: June 27, 2005