People v. Reilly

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Reilly

292 A.D.2d 399, 738 N.Y.S.2d 593, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2189

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMarch 4, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 292 A.D.2d 399 (People v. Reilly) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Reilly, 292 A.D.2d 399, 738 N.Y.S.2d 593, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2189 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rotker, J.), rendered May 20, 1999, convicting him of assault in the second degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to support the defendant’s conviction of assault in the second degree. The People proved that the complainant lost consciousness and sustained a brain contusion, broken nose, concussion, and several facial lacerations, including one which required sutures and would leave a permanent scar. Upon admission to the hospital the complainant’s condition was considered to be “life threatening.” Accordingly, [400]*400there was sufficient evidence that the defendant caused serious physical injury (see, People v Briggs, 285 AD2d 514, lv denied 97 NY2d 679; People v Bailey, 275 AD2d 663; People v Martinez, 257 AD2d 667).

The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit. Gold-stein, J.P., Friedmann, McGinity and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rotker, J.), rendered May 20, 1999, convicting him of assault in the second degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to support the defendant’s conviction of assault in the second degree. The People proved that the complainant lost consciousness and sustained a brain contusion, broken nose, concussion, and several facial lacerations, including one which required sutures and would leave a permanent scar. Upon admission to the hospital the complainant’s condition was considered to be “life threatening.” Accordingly, [400]*400there was sufficient evidence that the defendant caused serious physical injury (see, People v Briggs, 285 AD2d 514, lv denied 97 NY2d 679; People v Bailey, 275 AD2d 663; People v Martinez, 257 AD2d 667).

The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit. Gold-stein, J.P., Friedmann, McGinity and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

292 A.D.2d 399, 738 N.Y.S.2d 593, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2189, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-reilly-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack