Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000

People v. Wade

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided July 10, 2000

274 A.D.2d 438; 710 N.Y.S.2d 626; 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7706

Cases that cite this one

10 later published cases cite this decision.

People v. Gragnano (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2009)
People v. Johnson (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2025)
People v. Watson (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2019)
COHENS, JOSEPH A., PEOPLE v (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)
People v. Dilly (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)
People v. Millett (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2006)
People v. Oglesby (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2005)
People v. Morales (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2005)
People v. Abera (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2003)
People v. Robinson (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2001)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

—Appeal by the de*439fendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Galasso, J.), rendered March 9, 1999, convicting him of assault in the first degree, assault in the second degree (two counts), criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and assault in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, expert medical testimony may be used to establish that an injury was caused by a dangerous instrument (see, People v Wilson, 240 AD2d 774, 775; People v Goode, 216 AD2d 579; People v Davis, 163 AD2d 826). Here, an emergency room nurse testified that the nature of the lacerations to the victim were “clear cut” with “no jagged edges” and concluded that they were caused by a sharp instrument such as a knife, blade, piece of glass, or scalpel. Such evidence belies the defendant’s contention that the evidence was insufficient to establish the use of a dangerous instrument (see, People v Vincent, 231 AD2d 444). Moreover, it was unnecessary for the police to recover the weapon in order to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Vincent, supra).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05) or without merit. Bracken, J. P., Joy, McGinity and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.