From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Jamell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 10, 2005
23 A.D.3d 1076 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)

Opinion

KA 03-00623.

November 10, 2005.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Stephen R. Sirkin, A.J.), rendered January 22, 2003. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of assault in the second degree.

EDWARD J. NOWAK, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (WILLIAM G. CLAUSS OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

MICHAEL C. GREEN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (PATRICK H. FIERRO OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.

Present: Scudder, J.P., Martoche, Pine, Lawton and Hayes, JJ.


It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict of assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05) for causing physical injury to the victim by means of a dangerous instrument. Defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that the evidence is legally insufficient to support the conviction ( see People v. Gray, 86 NY2d 10, 19). In any event, that contention is without merit ( see generally People v. Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). The victim testified that she has a permanent two-inch scar on her left earlobe, that the area remains painful and that she can no longer wear earrings ( see Penal Law § 10.00; § 120.05 [2]). Although the object used by defendant may have been a cell phone or a box cutter, the object nevertheless became a dangerous instrument when defendant used it "in a manner which render[ed] it readily capable of causing serious physical injury" ( People v. Carter, 53 NY2d 113, 116; see also Penal Law § 10.00). Defendant's challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence before the grand jury is not properly before us. "It is well settled that, 'when a judgment of conviction has been rendered based upon legally sufficient trial evidence, appellate review of a claim alleging insufficiency of Grand Jury evidence is barred'" ( People v. Bastian, 294 AD2d 882, 883, lv denied 98 NY2d 694, quoting People v. Wiggins, 89 NY2d 872, 874; see CPL 210.30). Finally, the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.


Summaries of

People v. Jamell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 10, 2005
23 A.D.3d 1076 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
Case details for

People v. Jamell

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. KAREEM JAMELL PRIOR…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Nov 10, 2005

Citations

23 A.D.3d 1076 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
2005 N.Y. Slip Op. 8473
804 N.Y.S.2d 877

Citing Cases

People v. Tavarez

"'Serious physical injury' means physical injury which creates a substantial risk of death, or which causes…

People v. Soares

Viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution ( see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621), this…