Opinion
March 24, 1986
Appeal from the County Court, Suffolk County (Rohl, J.).
Judgment affirmed.
The decision of the hearing court that the police had probable cause to arrest the defendant was amply supported by the record (see, People v. McRay, 51 N.Y.2d 594, 602; People v. Petralia, 62 N.Y.2d 47, cert denied 469 U.S. 852; People v. Chestnut, 51 N.Y.2d 14, cert denied 449 U.S. 1018; People v. Duncan, 75 A.D.2d 823, 824).
We reject the defendant's contention that the indictment was jurisdictionally defective because it merely alleged "deviate sexual intercourse" without greater specificity. There was never any uncertainty as to the specific act involved, as evidenced by the defendant's own statements. Moreover, the People promptly sent the defendant's attorney a "Voluntary Disclosure" letter which particularized the nature of the deviate sexual intercourse alleged in the indictment. So long as a defendant receives sufficient information to put him on notice as to which acts specifically are being charged, a simplified indictment will not be dismissed as jurisdictionally defective (see, People v. Iannone, 45 N.Y.2d 589; People v. Bogdanoff, 254 N.Y. 16, 24).
We have examined the defendant's other contentions and have found them to be without merit. Mangano, J.P., Gibbons, Niehoff and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.