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. Jose PINERO-BAEZ, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (William A. Wetzel, J.), rendered June 9, 2008, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of assault in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to a term of 5 years, and judgment, same court (Richard Carruthers, J.), rendered July 16, 2008, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of robbery in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second violent felony offender, to a concurrent term of 10 years, unanimously affirmed.
The court properly exercised its discretion in permitting the People to introduce a threatening statement, containing the words “I shoot people,” that defendant made to a court officer who was trying to escort him back to Department of Correction custody following a court appearance. This entire statement, including the quoted phrase, expressed a threat to use force against the officer, and was highly probative of defendant's intent to prevent the officer “from performing a lawful duty” (Penal Law § 120.05[3] ). In any event, even if the phrase “I shoot people” should have been redacted, its admission was harmless.
The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v. Danielson, 9 N.Y.3d 342, 348-349, 849 N.Y.S.2d 480, 880 N.E.2d 1 [2007] ). There was ample evidence to support the element of physical injury (see e.g. People v. Wade, 41 A.D.3d 288, 839 N.Y.S.2d 724 [2007], lv. denied 9 N.Y.3d 883, 842 N.Y.S.2d 795, 874 N.E.2d 762 [2007] ). That element can be established through a victim's credible description of his or her injuries (see People v. Guidice, 83 N.Y.2d 630, 636, 612 N.Y.S.2d 350, 634 N.E.2d 951 [1994] ); in any event, the officer's testimony was corroborated by medical records.
We perceive no basis for reducing the 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: November 10, 2009
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)