Opinion
10-21-2014
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Vladimir MATOS, Defendant–Appellant.
Hughes Hubbard & Reed LLP, New York (Quan Trinh of counsel), for appellant. Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Sheila O'Shea of counsel), for respondent.
Hughes Hubbard & Reed LLP, New York (Quan Trinh of counsel), for appellant.
Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Sheila O'Shea of counsel), for respondent.
Opinion Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael R. Sonberg, J.), rendered May 11, 2012, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of assault in the first degree (two counts), assault in the second degree (two counts) and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and sentencing him to an aggregate term of 12 years, unanimously affirmed.
The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v. Danielson, 9 N.Y.3d 342, 348–349, 849 N.Y.S.2d 480, 880 N.E.2d 1 [2007] ). The element of serious physical injury was satisfied by evidence supporting the conclusion that the wounds inflicted by defendant caused serious disfigurement to both victims' faces under the standard set forth in People v. McKinnon, 15 N.Y.3d 311, 315–316, 910 N.Y.S.2d 767, 937 N.E.2d 524 (2010). Photographs depicting the victims' scars, medical testimony, testimony from the victims, and the reasonable inferences to be drawn from the evidence as to each victim warranted the conclusion that the elements of Penal Law § 120.10(2) were established (see People v. Gumbs, 107 A.D.3d 548, 968 N.Y.S.2d 452 [1st Dept.2013]lv. denied 22 N.Y.3d 1156, 984 N.Y.S.2d 640, 7 N.E.3d 1128 [2014] ).
We have considered and rejected defendant's remaining claims concerning the sufficiency and weight of the evidence.
TOM, J.P., RENWICK, MOSKOWITZ, RICHTER, KAPNICK, JJ., concur.