- Court
- New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department
- Case
- People v. Dore
- Date
- June 2, 2026
- Slip Op. No.
- 2026 NY Slip Op 03401
Background
Defendant Javid Dore was convicted after a jury trial in Supreme Court, Bronx County, of assault in the third degree under Penal Law section 120.00. The evidence at trial established that Dore robbed the victim of his bag, choked him, punched him repeatedly in the head, cheeks, neck, and shoulder, and kneed him multiple times in the back. The victim testified that his entire upper body and neck were sore following the attack and that he required a course of antibiotics to treat his injuries. At the time of trial, a scar remained on the victim’s arm. Dore was sentenced to thirty days in jail followed by three years of probation. On appeal, the defendant challenged the legal sufficiency of the evidence that the victim suffered a “physical injury” as defined by Penal Law section 10.00(9) and argued that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence.
Holding
The Appellate Division unanimously affirmed the conviction. The Court found that the People presented legally sufficient evidence that the victim suffered a physical injury, and that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. Under Penal Law section 10.00(9), physical injury means impairment of physical condition or substantial pain. Applying the standards from People v. Danielson, 9 NY3d 342 (2007), and People v. Baque, 43 NY3d 26 (2024), the Court held that the victim’s testimony about being choked, repeatedly punched, and kneed in the back constituted an experience that would normally bring more than a little pain. The jury could infer from the testimony that the victim suffered substantial pain, and from the scar remaining at trial, that he suffered a physical impairment.
Takeaways
The physical injury element of third-degree assault requires proof of either substantial pain or impairment of physical condition. A victim need not present medical records or testimony from a treating physician; testimony describing the nature and extent of the attack, the areas of the body affected, the resulting soreness, the need for medical treatment such as antibiotics, and the persistence of visible scars can be sufficient for a jury to find physical injury. The standard distinguishes between genuine physical harm and “petty slaps, shoves, kicks, and the like,” and a sustained beating involving multiple blows to the head, neck, and torso falls squarely on the side of physical injury.
Why It Matters
This decision is useful guidance for prosecutors and defense attorneys litigating the physical injury element of assault charges. The Court’s affirmance confirms that the physical injury threshold in third-degree assault cases can be met through victim testimony alone, without independent medical corroboration, where the described attack is of sufficient severity and the victim reports soreness requiring medical treatment and displays lasting physical evidence of injury. Defense attorneys should note that the substantial pain standard is assessed objectively—whether the experience would normally be expected to cause more than minimal pain—rather than based solely on the victim’s subjective complaints. Prosecutors should elicit detailed testimony about the nature, duration, and physical aftermath of the attack to satisfy this standard.