PEOPLE v. GRAY (2021)

Judgment of conviction (Sandra Elena Roper, J., at plea; Laurie Peterson, J., at sentencing), rendered October 12, 2018, affirmed.

Since defendant waived prosecution by information, the accusatory instrument only had to satisfy the reasonable cause requirement of a misdemeanor complaint (see People v Dumay, 23 NY3d 518, 522 [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 assault in the third degree (see Penal Law § 120.00[1]). The “physical injury” element of the crime was satisfied by allegations that, in the course of committing a robbery, defendant and another individual “str[uck] [the victim] about the face with a closed fist, causing a laceration.” Based on these allegations, a reasonable person could infer that the victim felt substantial pain (see People v Henderson, 92 NY2d 677, 680 [1999]; Penal Law § 10.00[9]), a term that simply means “more than slight or trivial pain” (People v Chiddick, 8 NY3d 445, 447 [2007]; People v Mercado, 94 AD3d 502, 502 [2012], lv denied 19 NY3d 999 [2012]). At the pleading stage, defendant's intent to cause physical injury was readily inferable from his actions (see Matter of Edward H., 61 AD3d 473 [2009]; Matter of Joseph J., 299 AD2d 235 [2002]).

In any event, even if we were to agree with defendant that the assault charge was jurisdictionally defective, the proper remedy would be to remand for further proceedings on the remaining charges in the felony complaint. Since defendant is not entitled to dismissal of the accusatory instrument, the only relief requested on appeal, we affirm on this basis as well.

Per Curiam.

All concur.