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. Jerry STEPHENSON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Gregory Carro, J.), rendered July 14, 2005, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of robbery in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to a term of 15 years, unanimously affirmed.
Defendant's argument that the People failed to prove the element of physical injury (Penal Law § 10.00[9] ) is unpreserved and we decline to reach it in the interest of justice. Were we to consider this claim, we would find that the verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence. We further find that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. The evidence supported the conclusion that the victim sustained physical injury (see People v. Guidice, 83 N.Y.2d 630, 636, 612 N.Y.S.2d 350, 634 N.E.2d 951 [1994] ). In the commission of the robbery, defendant went beyond the category of “petty slaps, shoves, kicks and the like delivered out of hostility, meanness and similar motives” (Matter of Philip A., 49 N.Y.2d 198, 200, 424 N.Y.S.2d 418, 400 N.E.2d 358 [1980] ), when he punched the victim in the mouth and bit him on the biceps and shoulder, causing him to bleed, and the nature of the injuries supported the inference that they caused substantial pain. Accordingly, defendant was not prejudiced by the fact that his trial counsel made only a general motion for a trial order of dismissal (see People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708, 713-714, 674 N.Y.S.2d 629, 697 N.E.2d 584 [1998]; see also Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 [1984] ). To the extent that defendant is also claiming that his counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to raise the physical injury issue in his summation, which focused on misidentification, that claim is unreviewable on direct appeal because it involves matters of strategy not reflected in the record (see People v. Rivera, 71 N.Y.2d 705, 709, 530 N.Y.S.2d 52, 525 N.E.2d 698 [1988]; People v. Love, 57 N.Y.2d 998, 457 N.Y.S.2d 238, 443 N.E.2d 486 [1982] ).
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: January 30, 2007
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)