Appeal from a judgment of the Justice Court of the Town of Greenburgh, Westchester County (Doris T. Friedman, J.), rendered on November 10, 2004. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of attempted assault in the third degree.

Judgment reversed on the law and matter remanded to the court below for a new trial.

Contrary to defendant's contention, the original information's factual allegations sufficed to allege that the complainant sustained a physical injury (Penal Law §§ 10.00 [*2]
[9]; 120.00 [1]) and, thus, was a jurisdictionally sufficient accusatory instrument (see CPL 100.15, 100.40). Since the People announced their trial readiness within the statutory time (CPL 30.30 [1] [b]; see e.g. People v Charvat, 8 Misc 3d 13 [App Term, 9th & 10th Jud Dists 2005]), defendant was not denied her right to a speedy trial.

Defendant's contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt on the ground that the People did not establish her intent to cause physical injury was not preserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10 [1995]) and we decline to reach the issue in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction (see CPL 470.15 [3] [c], 6 [a]).

Defendant further contends that she was denied the right to a fair trial because she is deaf, and the court below failed to appoint an interpreter for her during the trial.
Notwithstanding the fact that defendant had a cochlear implant in her right ear, the court was made aware of the fact that defendant had to read lips in order to understand speech. Thus, pursuant to Judiciary Law § 390, an interpreter should have been [*3]
appointed to assist the defendant. Consequently, defendant was deprived of the right to a fair trial (NY Const, art 1, § 6), and a new trial is warranted.

In view of the foregoing, we pass upon no other issues raised on appeal.

Rudolph, P.J., Angiolillo and Tanenbaum, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: August 18, 2006