From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Franklin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 17, 1989
149 A.D.2d 617 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)

Opinion

April 17, 1989

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Broomer, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the law, by reducing the defendant's conviction to robbery in the third degree, vacating the sentence imposed, and remitting the matter to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for resentencing.

The evidence adduced by the prosecution indicated that the complainant was hit on the head and "passed out", but regained consciousness "a minute" later and did not display any impairment of physical function. The complainant testified that he felt dizzy and achy for about "four or five hours", and there was slight bleeding from his head. However, the complainant did not go to the hospital or seek medical attention. Under these circumstances, the evidence was legally insufficient to establish that the complainant suffered physical injury within the meaning of Penal Law § 10.00 (9) (People v. Goins, 129 A.D.2d 733; People v. Suarez, 119 A.D.2d 839). Since the evidence was sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt of robbery in the third degree, we have reduced the robbery in the second degree conviction to one for robbery in the third degree. We have examined the defendant's remaining arguments including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, and find them either to be unpreserved for appellate review or without merit (People v Sierra, 143 A.D.2d 1065; People v. Burnett, 136 A.D.2d 888; People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Mangano, J.P., Bracken, Brown and Harwood, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

People v. Franklin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 17, 1989
149 A.D.2d 617 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
Case details for

People v. Franklin

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. KENNETH FRANKLIN…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Apr 17, 1989

Citations

149 A.D.2d 617 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
540 N.Y.S.2d 288

Citing Cases

United States v. Ray

New York courts have not precisely defined “impairment of physical condition,” but their rulings have begun…

People v. Windbush

We agree with the defendant that the People did not meet their burden of establishing the defendant's guilt…