PEOPLE v. ETAH (2020)

ORDERED that the judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted of assault in the third degree (Penal Law § 120.00 [1]). On appeal, defendant argues that the evidence adduced at trial was legally insufficient to support the conviction, as the People failed to prove the required element of “physical injury” (Penal Law § 120.00 [1]). Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, as we must (see People v. Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621 [1983]), we find that there is a valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences from which a rational jury could have found the elements of the crime proven beyond a reasonable doubt (see People v. Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 349 [2007]; People v. Williams, 84 NY2d 925, 926 [1994]). The element of physical injury was established by evidence that the complainant experienced substantial pain (see Penal Law § 10.00 [9]). Further, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt of assault in the third degree was not against the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15 [5]; People v. Danielson, 9 NY3d 342; People v. Romero, 7 NY3d 633 [2006]).

Defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.

Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is affirmed.

ADAMS, P.J., TOLBERT and RUDERMAN, JJ., concur.