People v. Valencia

50 A.D.3d 1163, 856 N.Y.S.2d 250
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 29, 2008
StatusPublished
Cited by18 cases

This text of 50 A.D.3d 1163 (People v. Valencia) 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. Valencia, 50 A.D.3d 1163, 856 N.Y.S.2d 250 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme [1164]*1164Court, Queens County (Latella, J.), rendered December 13, 2005, convicting him of robbery in the second degree and assault in the second degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant was convicted of robbery in the second degree and assault in the second degree. He claims that his conviction was not based on legally sufficient evidence that the victim suffered “physical injury,” as defined by the Penal Law. We disagree. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to support the finding that the complainant sustained a physical injury as defined by the Penal Law (see Penal Law § 10.00 [9]; § 160.10 [2]; § 120.05 [6]). The victim testified that the defendant forcibly entered her car and repeatedly banged her head on the car door. The victim sustained a black eye and bruising on her face, neck, and shoulders, and experienced pain for approximately one week. The evidence of the circumstances of the attack and the victim’s injuries was sufficient to establish that she suffered “physical injury” because she suffered substantial pain (see Penal Law § 10.00 [9]; People v Chiddick, 8 NY3d 445, 447-448 [2007]; People v Henderson, 92 NY2d 677, 680 [1999]; People v Guidice, 83 NY2d 630, 636 [1994]; People v Branch, 306 AD2d 537 [2003]).

Further, upon the exercise of our factual review power (see CPL 470.15 [5]), we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633 [2006]). Miller, J.P., Dillon, McCarthy and Chambers, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Matter of Kalyan v. Trasybule
2020 NY Slip Op 07383 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
People v. Jackson (Miriam)
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017
People v. Rivera
126 A.D.3d 818 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
People v. Rose
120 A.D.3d 593 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
People v. Wahhab
118 A.D.3d 925 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
People v. Kelly
114 A.D.3d 879 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
People v. Bernadotte
107 A.D.3d 1012 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
People v. Stocks
101 A.D.3d 1049 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
People v. Boucher
97 A.D.3d 597 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
People v. Rahman
84 A.D.3d 1119 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
People v. Velasquez
79 A.D.3d 1153 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
People v. Kenner
77 A.D.3d 853 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
People v. Felix
56 A.D.2d 796 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
50 A.D.3d 1163, 856 N.Y.S.2d 250, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-valencia-nyappdiv-2008.