People v. Mercado
| Decision Date | 10 April 2012 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Samuel MERCADO, Defendant–Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 02609
94 A.D.3d 502
941 N.Y.S.2d 501
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent,
v.
Samuel MERCADO, Defendant–Appellant.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
April 10, 2012.
Steven Banks, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Lawrence T. Hausman of counsel), for appellant.
Robert T. Johnson, District Attorney, Bronx (Justin J. Braun of counsel), for respondent.
*502 Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Cassandra Mullen, J.), rendered August 24, 2010, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of assault in the third degree, and sentencing him to a term of six months, unanimously modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, to the extent of reducing the sentence to a period of 3 years' probation, and otherwise affirmed.
The factual allegations contained in the misdemeanor information were sufficient to satisfy the physical injury element of assault in the third degree. The information recited that “defendant struck informant ... on his face with a closed fist,” and that “as a result of defendant's actions, he suffered swelling and bruising to the left side of his face and bruising and swelling to his left eye as well as experienced annoyance, alarm and fear for his physical safety.”
These allegations were sufficient to warrant the conclusion that the victim suffered substantial pain. As in People v. Henderson, 92 N.Y.2d 677, 685 N.Y.S.2d 409, 708 N.E.2d 165 [1999], based on the allegations, “a jury could certainly infer that the victim felt substantial pain” ( id. at 680, 685 N.Y.S.2d 409, 708 N.E.2d 165). We note that “substantial pain” (Penal Law § 10.00[9] ) simply means “more than slight or trivial pain” ( People v. Chiddick, 8 N.Y.3d 445, 447, 834 N.Y.S.2d 710, 866 N.E.2d 1039 [2007] ).
We find the sentence excessive to the extent indicated.
ANDRIAS, J.P., FRIEDMAN, ACOSTA, FREEDMAN, RICHTER, JJ., concur.To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Medina, 1095, 1786/13.
...102 A.D.3d 464, 961 N.Y.S.2d 10 [1st Dept.2013], lv. denied 20 N.Y.3d 1097, 965 N.Y.S.2d 793, 988 N.E.2d 531 [2013] ; People v. Mercado, 94 A.D.3d 502, 941 N.Y.S.2d 501 [1st Dept.2012], lv. denied 19 N.Y.3d 999, 951 N.Y.S.2d 475, 975 N.E.2d 921 [2012] ). The evidence also supports conclusio......
-
Aparicio v. Goldberg
...Slip Op. 0261094 A.D.3d 502942 N.Y.S.2d 58Ada Pretto APARICIO, etc., Plaintiff–Appellant,v.Dr. Gary GOLDBERG, Defendant–Respondent, Montefiore Hospital Center, et al., Defendants.Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.April 10, [942 N.Y.S.2d 59] Lynn Law Firm, LLP, Sy......
-
Martha B. v. Julian P., 16047
...of that offense may be satisfied by relatively minor injuries causing “ ‘more than slight or trivial pain’ ” (People v. Mercado, 94 A.D.3d 502, 941 N.Y.S.2d 501 [1st Dept.2012], lv. denied 19 N.Y.3d 999, 951 N.Y.S.2d 475, 975 N.E.2d 921 [2012] ; People v. Martinez, 90 A.D.3d 409, 410, 933 N......
-
People v. Wayne B.
...eyebrow and right cheek, which took a week to subside, and required treatment with topical ointments (see e.g. People v. Mercado, 94 A.D.3d 502, 941 N.Y.S.2d 501 [1st Dept.2012], lv. denied 19 N.Y.3d 999, 951 N.Y.S.2d 475, 975 N.E.2d 921 [2012] ).TOM, J.P., SAXE, FEINMAN, CLARK, KAPNICK, JJ., ...