People v. Williams

• Decision Date: 20 April 2012
• Citation: 94 A.D.3d 1452,2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 03025,942 N.Y.S.2d 845
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Tarias D. WILLIAMS, Defendant–Appellant.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 03025

94 A.D.3d 1452

942 N.Y.S.2d 845

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,

v.Tarias D. WILLIAMS, Defendant–Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.

April 20, 2012.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (David D. Egan, J.), rendered August 8, 2008. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of assault in the second degree.Timothy P. Donaher, Public Defender, Rochester (Timothy S. Davis of Counsel), for defendant–appellant.

Sandra Doorley, District Attorney, Rochester (Stephen X. O'Brien of Counsel), for respondent.

MEMORANDUM:

On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict of assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05[1] ), defendant contends that the evidence is legally insufficient to establish that he intended to cause serious physical injury to the 66–year–old victim. We reject that contention. The victim and another witness testified at trial that defendant repeatedly punched the victim in the face while he was standing and after defendant had knocked him to the ground. Further, defendant struck the victim with sufficient force to cause a retrobulbar hemorrhage, as well as a fracture of the orbit, complete displacement of the lens and damage to the retina of the victim's right eye, which resulted in permanent partial loss of vision. Defendant is “ ‘presumed to intend the natural and probable consequences of his actions' ” ( People v. Roman, 13 A.D.3d 1115, 1116, 787 N.Y.S.2d 568, lv. denied 4 N.Y.3d 802, 795 N.Y.S.2d 178, 828 N.E.2d 94), and the natural and probable consequence of repeatedly punching a defenseless man in the face is that he will sustain a serious physical injury within the meaning of Penal Law § 10.00(10) ( see People v. Meacham, 84 A.D.3d 1713, 1714, 922 N.Y.S.2d 721, lv. denied 17 N.Y.3d 808, 929 N.Y.S.2d 568, 953 N.E.2d 806; People v. Angelo M., 231 A.D.2d 925, 925–926, 647 N.Y.S.2d 895, lv. denied 89 N.Y.2d 862, 653 N.Y.S.2d 285, 675 N.E.2d 1238, 89 N.Y.2d 1087, 660 N.Y.S.2d 381, 682 N.E.2d 982).

The sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

CENTRA, J.P., PERADOTTO, SCONIERS, and MARTOCHE, JJ., concur.