By notice of motion and supporting affirmation from Pat Bonanno, Esq., dated November 6, 2021, the defendant moves to dismiss the accusatory instrument for facial insufficiency, request hearings, and other forms of relief.

By an affirmation in opposition and memorandum of law submitted by ADA Samantha Sayegh, dated December 6, 2021, the People oppose the defendant's motion to dismiss the accusatory instrument and address the defendant's other arguments.

To be sufficient on its face, an information must contain an accusatory section and a factual section. (CPL 100.15[1]). The accusatory section must specify the offenses charged. (CPL 100.15[2]). The factual section must contain a statement from the complainant "alleging facts of an evidentiary character supporting or tending to support the charges." (CPL 100.15[3]). The factual section, along with any supporting deposition, must "provide reasonable cause to believe that the defendant committed the offenses charged." (CPL 100.40[1][b]).

In this case, the moving papers fail to indicate in what specific way that the accusatory instrument fails to be facially sufficient. Therefore, the motion to dismiss for facial insufficiency is denied.

As to the other arguments in the moving papers, in this case there does not appear to be statement notice nor any physical property recovered so a Huntley and/or Mapp hearing would not be warranted. As to the request for a Bill of Particulars , the People supplied the information in their response. Lastly, any Sandoval issues would be more properly addressed as a motion in limine before trial.

The foregoing is the decision and order of the court.