Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him following a jury trial of assault in the second degree (Penal Law § 120.05). Contrary to the contention of defendant, the evidence is legally sufficient to establish that he injured the victim by using a dangerous instrument ( see People v Wilson, 240 AD2d 774, 775, lv denied 90 NY2d 899; People v Vincent, 231 AD2d 444, 445, lv denied 89 NY2d 931; People v Pagan, 163 AD2d 681, 681-682). The nature of the victim's wounds supports the inference that defendant used a sharp, dangerous instrument to inflict the victim's injuries and that the victim could not have sustained those wounds in the manner suggested by defendant at trial.

Ample evidence further supported the jury's determination that defendant committed the crime of assault in the second degree since he intentionally caused physical injury to another by means of a dangerous instrument (see, Penal Law § 120.05); Frank's physical injuries were demonstrated at trial and his testimony established that he was struck in the face with a plate. From this testimony, the jury could be found to have reasonably concluded that, under these circumstances, the plate was readily capable of causing serious physical injury (see, People v. Pagan, 163 A.D.2d 681; see also, Penal Law § 10.00).

The victim's treating physician testified that he sustained a large laceration to his neck and a 10-inch laceration to his chest, the latter of which penetrated to his sternum. That evidence clearly supports the inference that some object, as opposed to defendant's hand, was used to inflict the two wounds sustained by the victim and the very nature of the wounds demonstrate, a fortiori, that said object was capable of causing serious physical injury ( see, People v. Pagan, 163 A.D.2d 681, 682). Accordingly, we find that the People adduced legally sufficient circumstantial evidence to establish that defendant used a dangerous instrument ( see, Penal Law § 10.00) to inflict the injuries in question.