Opinion
December 26, 1989
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Bonomo, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The evidence adduced at trial was sufficient to establish that the complainant sustained "physical injury" as defined in Penal Law § 10.00 (9) in connection with the assault convictions (see, Matter of Philip A., 49 N.Y.2d 198, 200; see also, People v Tabachnik, 131 A.D.2d 611; People v Sherrod, 132 A.D.2d 683). These charges were based on the defendant having hit the complainant with his fist on the right side of her face and around the eye. The complainant further testified that the whole side of her head was "killing" her and that the pain continued for "about a week". The testimony of an eyewitness neighbor indicated that after the assault, the complainant "had been crying and she had a few bruises on her face".
The defendant's further contentions challenging various statements made by the Trial Judge were not preserved for appellate review as a matter of law. In any event, we have examined the contentions and do not find they warrant reversal in the interest of justice. In view of the overwhelming evidence of guilt, there is no reasonable possibility that any error contributed to the defendant's conviction (see, People v Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 237).
As to the defendant's sentence, we note that the trial court correctly weighed the proper factors, including, inter alia, the defendant's history and the circumstances of the case. Therefore, we find no basis for modification of the sentence (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Mollen, P.J., Thompson, Lawrence and Eiber, JJ., concur.