People v. Santiago (Rafael)
This text of 2024 NY Slip Op 51259(U) (People v. Santiago (Rafael)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
| People v Santiago (Rafael) |
| 2024 NY Slip Op 51259(U) |
| Decided on September 12, 2024 |
| Appellate Term, First Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports. |
Decided on September 12, 2024
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: Hagler, P.J., Brigantti, Tisch, JJ.
570107/19
against
Rafael Santiago, Defendant-Appellant.
Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Phyllis Chu, J.), rendered January 7, 2019, convicting him, upon a plea of guilty, of assault in the third degree, and imposing sentence.
Per Curiam.
Judgment of conviction (Phyllis Chu, J.), rendered January 7, 2019, affirmed.
In view of defendant's knowing waiver of the right to prosecution by information, the accusatory instrument only had to satisfy the reasonable cause requirement of a misdemeanor complaint (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 third-degree assault (see Penal Law § 120.00). The "physical injury" element of the offense was satisfied by allegations that defendant "str[uck] [the complainant] about the face with a closed fist, causing redness, swelling, and bruising to her right eye and substantial pain." Based on these allegations, a reasonable person could infer that the victim felt "substantial pain" (Penal Law § 10.00[9]; see People v Henderson, 92 NY2d 677, 680 [1999]; People v Mercado, 94 AD3d 502 [2012], lv denied 19 NY3d 999 [2012]), a term which simply means "more than slight or trivial pain" (People v Chiddick, 8 NY3d 445, 447 [2007]).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.
I concur I concur I concurDecision Date: September 12, 2024
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2024 NY Slip Op 51259(U), Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-santiago-rafael-nyappterm-2024.