People v Perez (Louis)

[*1] People v Perez (Louis) 2014 NY Slip Op 51851(U) Decided on December 30, 2014 Appellate Term, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on December 30, 2014
SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, FIRST DEPARTMENT
PRESENT: Lowe, III, P.J., Schoenfeld, Hunter, Jr., JJ.
570072/2013

The People of the State of New York, Respondent,

against

Louis Perez, Defendant-Appellant.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal court of the City of New York, New York County (Tamiko A. Amaker, J.), rendered December 4, 2012, convicting him, upon a plea of guilty, of assault in the third degree, and imposing sentence.

Per Curiam.

Judgment of conviction (Tamiko A. Amaker, J. at plea and sentence) rendered December 4, 2012, affirmed.

In view of the defendant's knowing waiver of his right to prosecution by information, the facial insufficiency of the accusatory instrument must be assessed under the standard required of a misdemeanor complaint (see People v Dumay, 23 NY3d 51 [2014]). So viewed, the accusatory instrument was jurisdictionally valid because it described facts of an evidentiary nature establishing reasonable cause to believe that defendant was guilty of third-degree assault (see Penal Law § 120.00[1]), the offense to which defendant ultimately pleaded guilty. The "physical injury" element of the charged crime was satisfied by allegations that defendant placed the "burning end" of a lit cigarette on the back of the complainant's neck, causing the complainant "to sustain redness, broken skin, a burn mark, and substantial pain." Based on these allegations, "a jury could certainly infer that the victim felt substantial pain" (People v Henderson, 92 NY2d 677, 680 [1999]; see Penal Law § 10.00[9]), a term which simply means "more than slight or trivial pain" (People v Chiddick, 8 NY3d 445, 447 [2007]; see People v Mercado, 94 AD3d 502, 502 [2012], lv denied 19 NY3d 999 [2012]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.

I concurI concurI concur
Decision Date: December 30, 2014