PER CURIAM

Read Full-Text Decision

Husain appealed from a judgment convicting him of standing or parking a vehicle in front of a public or private driveway, upon his guilty plea. In a factually sufficient accusatory instrument prosecutors charged him with violating Vehicle & Traffic Law §1202″2D.” Criminal Court granted amendment to recite the correct subsection “(a)(2)(a)” yet with an incorrect title of “double parking.” Under a negotiated plea and sentence agreement, Husain pleaded guilty to §1202(a)(2)(a)—defense counsel also erroneously labeled double parking. Husain argued prosecutors could not amend an accusatory instrument to add a new offense not factually supported, alleging he could not plead guilty to an uncharged offense he never committed. The panel noted “misnomers” in designating a charged offense were not jurisdictional and may be corrected by amendment, and also to allege an offense not initially charged that was supported by the facts. It found the amendment herein did not otherwise involve a change forbidden by statute or an alteration to factual allegations necessary to support the §1202(a)(2)(a) charge. Also, by his guilty plea, Husain forfeited any error of nonjurisdictional significance, and failed to move to vacate his guilty plea. Thus, the panel affirmed the conviction.