Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Heidi C. Cesare, J.), rendered July 21, 2016, convicting him, upon a plea of guilty, of disorderly conduct, and imposing sentence.

Per Curiam.

Judgment of conviction (Heidi C. Cesare, J.), rendered July 21, 2016, affirmed.

In view of defendant's knowing waiver of his right to prosecution by information, the accusatory instrument only had to satisfy the reasonable cause requirement (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 was guilty of the charged offense of trademark counterfeiting in the third degree (see Penal Law § 165.71). For purposes of our threshold, pleading stage inquiry, the accusatory instrument sufficiently alleged that the wallet and handbag offered for sale by defendant, which bore trademarks of Michael Kors, were counterfeit, based upon several specifically enumerated features distinguishing them from genuine Michael Kors merchandise, and that the allegedly counterfeit trademarks appearing on the handbags were registered and in use (see People v Ndiaye, 44 Misc 3d 135[A], 2014 NY Slip Op 51208[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2014]; People v Wele, 41 Misc 3d 133[A], 2013 NY Slip Op 51804[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2013], lv denied 22 NY3d 1044 [2013]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.