Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court, New York County (A. Kirke Bartley, Jr., J.), rendered January 12, 2004, after a nonjury trial, convicting her of criminal trespass in the third degree, and imposing sentence.

PER CURIAM:

Judgment of conviction (A. Kirke Bartley, Jr., J.), rendered January 12, 2004, affirmed.

The misdemeanor complaint and supporting depositions sufficiently set forth the factual basis for the second-degree criminal trespass charge of which defendant ultimately was convicted by alleging, inter alia, that defendant was observed at approximately 1:30 A.M. in the third-floor hallway of an apartment building that was marked by "no trespassing" and other signs restricting access; that defendant acknowledged that she neither lived in the building nor knew "anyone here," indicating that she was in "the wrong building"; and that defendant lacked the "permission or authority to be inside the dwelling". These allegations, "given a fair and not overly restrictive or technical reading" (People v Casey, 95 NY2d 354, 360 [2000]), were sufficient for pleading purposes to establish that the dwelling premises was "fenced or otherwise enclosed in a manner designed to exclude intruders" (Penal Law § 140.10 [a]; see generally People v Rodriguez, 159 AD2d 201 [1990]; lv denied 76 NY2d 742 [1990]; cf. People v Moore, 5 NY3d 725 [2005] [no allegation that public building on college campus was "fenced or otherwise enclosed"]) and that defendant knowingly entered or remained unlawfully therein (see People v Babarcich, 166 AD2d 655 [1990], lv denied 76 NY2d 1019 [1990]).
This constitutes the decision and order of the court.
I concurI concur
Decision Date: August 29, 2006