Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Marisol Martinez-Alonso, J.), rendered January 7, 2020, convicting him, upon a plea of guilty, of driving while intoxicated, and imposing sentence.

Per Curiam.

Judgment of conviction (Marisol Martinez-Alonso, J.), rendered January 7, 2020, 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, 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 operated a motor vehicle while in an intoxicated condition (see Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1192 [3]). Defendant's operation of the vehicle in question was satisfied by allegations that he was observed driving a specifically identified motor vehicle and crashing that vehicle into one owned by complainant (see People v Esposito, 33 NY3d 1016, 1017 [2019]; People v Gomez, 73 Misc 3d 140[A], 2021 NY Slip Op 51183[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2021], lv denied 38 NY3d 927 [2022]). Defendant's intoxicated condition was satisfied by allegations that he had watery and bloodshot eyes, the strong odor of alcohol on his breath, was unsteady on his feet and had a blood alcohol level of .21% (see People v Hohmeyer, 70 NY2d 41, 43-44 [1987]; People v Fiumara, 116 AD3d 421 [2014], lv denied 23 NY3d 1036 [2014]; see also People v Dondorfer, — NY3d —, 2026 NY Slip Op 00823 [2026]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.