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, etc., respondent, v. Gabriel Dilly, appellant.
Argued—April 11, 2011
DECISION & ORDER
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Konviser, J.), rendered June 24, 2009, convicting him of assault in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant was convicted of assault in the second degree pursuant to Penal Law § 120.05(2) in connection with an incident that occurred inside a Brooklyn night club. The jury found that the defendant caused physical injury to the complainant by means of a dangerous instrument. On appeal, the defendant contends that the evidence was legally insufficient and the verdict of guilt was against the weight of the evidence inasmuch as the People failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he used a dangerous instrument rather than simply punching the complainant during the altercation.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 621), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish that the defendant used a dangerous instrument. Moreover, upon reviewing the record here, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt as to assault in the second degree was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v. Romero, 7 NY3d 633). The People presented uncontroverted expert medical testimony from the physician who supervised a surgery to repair the complainant's tear duct days after the incident. This medical expert testified that the injury to the complainant's lower eyelid, which he called a laceration, could only have been caused by “an object with an edge” and could not have been caused by a fist (see People v. Wade, 274 A.D.2d 438; People v. Vincent, 231 A.D.2d 444).
The defendant's contentions that he was deprived of a fair trial by prosecutorial misconduct during summation are unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05[2]; People v. Romero, 7 NY3d 911, 912; People v. Carrieri, 49 AD3d 660, 662), are without merit, or constitute harmless error in light of the overwhelming evidence of his guilt (see People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 242; People v. Brody, 82 AD3d 784; People v. Porco, 71 AD3d 791, 794, lv granted 15 NY3d 854).
The defendant received the effective assistance of counsel (see People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708, 712). The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.
RIVERA, J.P., DICKERSON, HALL and COHEN, JJ., concur.
ENTER:
Matthew G. Kiernan
Clerk of the Court
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.
Docket No: 2009–06547 (Ind.No. 3249 /08)
Decided: May 17, 2011
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)