Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Eran LEV, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Bruce Allen, J.), rendered April 26, 2005, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of attempted assault in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of 5 years' probation, unanimously affirmed.
The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence. Evidence that defendant, wearing thick-soled sneakers, repeatedly kicked the fallen victim in her midsection with significant force supported the conclusion that defendant intended to cause physical injury, which was the natural and probable consequence of such conduct (see People v. Getch, 50 N.Y.2d 456, 465, 429 N.Y.S.2d 579, 407 N.E.2d 425 [1980] ), regardless of whether or not the kicks actually caused any injury. The evidence also supported the conclusion that defendant's sneaker, in the manner in which it was used, was readily capable of causing serious physical injury, and thus constituted a dangerous instrument (see People v. Carter, 53 N.Y.2d 113, 116, 440 N.Y.S.2d 607, 423 N.E.2d 30 [1981]; People v. Edwards, 16 A.D.3d 226, 227, 792 N.Y.S.2d 394 [2005], lv. denied 5 N.Y.3d 762, 801 N.Y.S.2d 256, 834 N.E.2d 1266 [2005] ). Defendant's acquittal on other charges does not warrant a different conclusion regarding the sufficiency of the evidence. To the extent that defendant is arguing that the verdict was repugnant, that argument is unpreserved (People v. Alfaro, 66 N.Y.2d 985, 499 N.Y.S.2d 378, 489 N.E.2d 1280 [1985] ), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find it to be without merit (see People v. Tucker, 55 N.Y.2d 1, 447 N.Y.S.2d 132, 431 N.E.2d 617 [1981] ).
Since defendant's argument that the charges submitted to the jury were multiplicitous was first raised in a post-verdict motion, it is unpreserved (see e.g. People v. Padro, 75 N.Y.2d 820, 552 N.Y.S.2d 555, 551 N.E.2d 1233 [1990] ), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would reject it (see People v. Saunders, 290 A.D.2d 461, 463, 736 N.Y.S.2d 90 [2002], lv. denied 98 N.Y.2d 681, 746 N.Y.S.2d 470, 774 N.E.2d 235 [2002] ).
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: October 05, 2006
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)