People v Uceta
2015 NY Slip Op 03194 [127 AD3d 1002]
April 15, 2015
Appellate Division, Second Department
As corrected through Wednesday, June 3, 2015


[*1]
 The People of the State of New York,Respondent,
v
Freddy Uceta, Appellant.

Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Patricia Pazner of counsel), for appellant.

Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano,Johnnette Traill, Jeanette Lifschitz, and Andrea Alvarez-Calderon of counsel), forrespondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County(Blumenfeld, J.), rendered April 26, 2013, convicting him of assault in the seconddegree, obstructing governmental administration in the second degree, and resistingarrest, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The complainant, a police officer, testified that as he was arresting the defendant forillegally selling Metrocard "swipes," the defendant resisted arrest, a struggle ensued, andthe complainant fell on subway stairs and hit his head on the railing. When thecomplainant hit his head on the railing, he felt a "sharp bang" followed by a "whiteoutand then tunnel vision." The complainant felt a "sharp pain" and was bleeding profuselyfrom his head for approximately 30-45 minutes after the subject incident. Thecomplainant was promptly treated at a hospital and received stitches. Later that same day,the complainant had a "splitting headache," for which he took Tylenol for a period ofthree days. The complainant also experienced swelling, with the bump on his headbecoming the size of "a tennis ball cut in half." As a result of the incident, thecomplainant missed seven days of work.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, viewing the evidence in the light mostfavorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621 [1983]), wefind that it was legally sufficient to establish the physical injury element of the crime ofassault in the second degree beyond a reasonable doubt (see Penal Law§§ 10.00 [9]; 120.05 [3]; People v Rose, 120 AD3d 593, 594 [2014]). Moreover,upon our independent review pursuant to CPL 470.15 (5), we are satisfied that theverdict of guilt on that count was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d633 [2006]). Balkin, J.P., Hall, Roman and Cohen, JJ., concur.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.