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. Dave WILLOCK, a/k/a Tyrone Artis, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lawrence Bernstein, J.), rendered May 7, 1999, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of assault in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 10 years and 1 year, respectively, unanimously affirmed.
Defendant's challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the assault charge is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interests of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that the verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence. There is no basis upon which to disturb the jury's determinations concerning credibility. The evidence established that the victim sustained a deep laceration to his index finger, down to the bone, which completely severed his flexor tendons and digital nerves. The victim's permanent loss of sensation and flexibility in his finger were sufficient to establish that he suffered the requisite protracted impairment to satisfy the element of serious physical injury (see Penal Law 10.00(10); People v. Kenward, 266 A.D.2d 155, 699 N.Y.S.2d 35). Furthermore, credible evidence that defendant approached the victim with a 10-inch knife and thrust it toward his heart clearly established that defendant intended to cause serious physical injury. We further find that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence.
Defendant was not prejudiced when the People briefly left a photograph of defendant in view of the jury, since this photograph, which was undisputedly admissible, was in evidence and had already been shown to the jury.
We perceive no basis for a reduction of sentence.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: October 08, 2002
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)