People v. Soto
| Decision Date | 15 June 1992 |
| Citation | 584 N.Y.S.2d 877,184 A.D.2d 673 |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Artemiro SOTO, Appellant. |
Philip L. Weinstein, New York City (Natalie Rea, of counsel), for appellant.
Richard A. Brown, Dist. Atty., Kew Gardens, N.Y. (Robin A. Forshaw and James Mattone, of counsel), for respondent.
Before THOMPSON, J.P., and BRACKEN, O'BRIEN and SANTUCCI, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (DeMakos, J.), rendered March 13, 1990, convicting him of assault in the second degree (two counts), obstructing governmental administration in the second degree, and criminal contempt in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Viewing the evidence adduced at trial in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt. Contrary to the defendant's contention, we find that the evidence adduced at trial established, that, as a result of their struggle with the defendant, two court officers suffered "physical injury" within the meaning of Penal Law § 10.00(9) (see, Matter of Philip A., 49 N.Y.2d 198, 200, 424 N.Y.S.2d 418, 400 N.E.2d 358; People v. Contes, supra, 60 N.Y.2d at 621, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932).
The testimony of the first officer establishes that both of his elbows were swollen and that he had a one-inch laceration on his left elbow. Both of his knees were swollen and discolored. He also had a bruise on his left shin that was bleeding. After receiving treatment at the scene, the officer went to the emergency room of a local hospital where X-rays were taken of his elbows, knees, and shin. The following week, he was treated by an orthopedic doctor for the injuries to his knees. As a result of his injuries, he missed three days of work and suffered from pain in various parts of his body for three weeks after the incident. Although he did not testify as to the magnitude of the pain that he suffered, the three-week duration of the pain is evidence of its severity and provides a basis for the inference that the pain was substantial (see, People v. McNair, 147 A.D.2d 593, 594, 537 N.Y.S.2d 888; People v. Hope, 128 A.D.2d 638, 639, 512 N.Y.S.2d 885).
The testimony of the second officer establishes that he suffered from...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jason J., Matter of
...517 N.E.2d 1344; People v. Miller, 146 A.D.2d 809, 537 N.Y.S.2d 287; People v. Scott, 162 A.D.2d 479, 556 N.Y.S.2d 171; People v. Soto, 184 A.D.2d 673, 584 N.Y.S.2d 877. The hearing court properly denied the appellant's request for a missing witness charge, since he failed to demonstrate th......
-
People v. Charles
...§ 120.05[2] ; Penal Law § 10.00[9] ; see People v. Chiddick, 8 N.Y.3d 445, 447, 834 N.Y.S.2d 710, 866 N.E.2d 1039 ; People v. Soto, 184 A.D.2d 673, 674, 584 N.Y.S.2d 877 ; People v. Rivera, 183 A.D.2d 792, 793, 583 N.Y.S.2d 520 ). Moreover, upon our independent review pursuant to CPL 470.15......
-
People v. Charles
...Law § 120.05[2]; Penal Law § 10.00[9]; see People v. Chiddick, 8 N.Y.3d 445, 447, 834 N.Y.S.2d 710, 866 N.E.2d 1039; People v. Soto, 184 A.D.2d 673, 674, 584 N.Y.S.2d 877; People v. Rivera, 183 A.D.2d 792, 793, 583 N.Y.S.2d 520). Moreover, upon our independent review pursuant to CPL 470.15(......
-
People v. McLean
...the complainant, regarding the extent and duration of his injuries, we find that this contention is without merit (see, People v. Soto, 184 A.D.2d 673, 584 N.Y.S.2d 877; People v. Bailey, 176 A.D.2d 809, 575 N.Y.S.2d 328; People v. Campbell, 157 A.D.2d 738, 550 N.Y.S.2d 33; People v. Lundqu......