People v Samantha S. (2013 NY Slip Op 51139(U))

People v Samantha S.

2013 NY Slip Op 51139(U) [40 Misc 3d 132(A)]

Decided on July 8, 2013

Appellate Term, Second Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

As corrected in part through October 18, 2013; it will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE TERM, SECOND DEPARTMENT, 9th and 10th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS

The People of the State of New York, Respondent, —

against

Samantha S. (Anonymous), Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the District Court of Suffolk County, First District (John Andrew Kay, J.), rendered November 29, 2011. The judgment adjudicated defendant a youthful offender upon a jury verdict finding her guilty of assault in the third degree.

ORDERED that the judgment adjudicating defendant a youthful offender is affirmed.

Defendant was adjudicated a youthful offender upon a jury verdict finding her guilty of assault in the third degree (Penal Law § 120.00 [1]). On appeal, defendant argues, among other things, that the District Court committed reversible error in allowing the complainant's hospital records to be admitted into evidence, and that, even if the hospital records had been properly admitted, the evidence of physical injury, a necessary element of the charge of assault in the third degree, was legally insufficient to support the conviction.

"Physical injury" is defined as an "impairment of physical condition or substantial pain" (Penal Law § 10.00 [9]). Here, the complainant, a high school student, testified that she was hit repeatedly by defendant, fell to the ground, rolled down a hill, and hit her head on the concrete, and that she then felt dizzy, that her head hurt severely, that her neck hurt, that she had cuts on her face, and that she was bleeding from her mouth. She further testified that she was taken to [*2]her pediatrician, subsequently went to the hospital twice, and stayed home from school for eight days. Viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution (People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621 [1983]), we find that this testimony, demonstrating an "impairment of physical condition or substantial pain," was legally sufficient to support the conviction (People v Chiddick, 8 NY3d 445, 447 [2007]; People v Henderson, 92 NY2d 677, 680 [1999]; People v Travis, 273 AD2d 544, 548 [2000]; People v Goode, 179 AD2d 676 [1992]), without considering the complainant's hospital records. Thus, this court need not reach the question of whether the complainant's medical records were properly admitted into evidence.

Defendant's remaining contention lacks merit. Accordingly, the judgment adjudicating defendant a youthful offender is affirmed.