People v. Mohammed
| Decision Date | 26 June 1990 |
| Citation | 162 A.D.2d 367,557 N.Y.S.2d 35 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Guled MOHAMMED, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
D.J. Stermer, Massapequa, for respondent.
S. Conners, New York City, for defendant-appellant.
Before KUPFERMAN, J.P., and MILONAS, ELLERIN, WALLACH and RUBIN, JJ.
Judgment of the Supreme Court, Bronx County (William Wallace, III, J.), rendered on January 4, 1988, convicting defendant, following a jury trial, of assault in the second degree and sentencing him to an indeterminate term of imprisonment of 2 1/3 to 7 years is unanimously affirmed.
Defendant herein, following a jury trial, was acquitted of rape, sexual abuse and weapon charges, but convicted of assault, specifically, breaking the complainant's arm. On appeal, he challenges the sufficiency of the evidence against him with respect to intent and whether the victim suffered a serious physical injury. In that regard, the complainant's testimony that defendant struck her with a karate chop in the course of a violent struggle constituted an adequate predicate from which the jury could conclude that defendant intended to cause injury (see People v. Hildenbrandt, 125 A.D.2d 819, 509 N.Y.S.2d 919, lv. to appeal den'd. 69 N.Y.2d 881, 515 N.Y.S.2d 1029, 507 N.E.2d 1099; People v. Thomas, 50 N.Y.2d 467, 429 N.Y.S.2d 584, 407 N.E.2d 430). Moreover, it is evident that the complainant suffered a "protracted impairment of health" (Penal Law 10.00[10] based upon the evidence that she suffered a fractured humerus requiring several weeks of immobilization. Defendant was, further, not entitled to a justification charge. Counsel did not request such an instruction in his twenty-four page request-to-charge memorandum, and the claim of self-defense was not raised either during the defense opening or summation. Finally, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing defendant.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Stetin
...A.D.2d 579, 579–580, 747 N.Y.S.2d 171 [2002], lv denied 99 N.Y.2d 535, 752 N.Y.S.2d 596, 782 N.E.2d 574 [2002] ; People v. Mohammed, 162 A.D.2d 367, 367, 557 N.Y.S.2d 35 [1990], lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 861, 560 N.Y.S.2d 1001, 561 N.E.2d 901 [1990] ; cf. People v. Kern, 75 N.Y.2d 638, 658, 555 N......
-
Admin. for Children's Servs. v. Ferida B. (In re Jonah B.)
...to be immobilized for more than two weeks, which is sufficient to establish a protracted impairment of health (see People v. Mohammed , 162 A.D.2d 367, 367, 557 N.Y.S.2d 35 ). In addition, the medical testimony revealed that this injury caused Talia pain and discomfort, and could take month......
-
State v. Dorrance
...urinated blood as a result, and was unable to return to work as a police officer for several days); People v. Mohammed, 162 A.D.2d 367, 557 N.Y.S.2d 35, 36 (1990) (memorandum decision) (victim suffered "protracted impairment of health" based on evidence of "fractured humerus [bone] requirin......
-
Clift v. Com.
...physical injury to cause "protracted loss or impairment of the function of any part of the body." See also People v. Mohammed, N.Y.App.Div., 162 A.D.2d 367, 557 N.Y.S.2d 35 (1990), where the Court held that the victim had suffered "protracted impairment of health" "based upon the evidence t......