PEOPLE v. VALTIN

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis upon which to disturb the jury's determinations concerning identification and credibility. There was ample evidence of the element of physical injury, including evidence that the victim's lip was bloody and swollen, that he received medical treatment, and that he experienced pain, dizziness and nausea for several days (see, People v. Guidice, 83 N.Y.2d 630, 636; People v. Spry, 232 A.D.2d 232, lv denied 89 N.Y.2d 930).

To the extent that certain evidence gave rise to an inference of consciousness of guilt, the court's refusal to deliver such an instruction does not warrant reversal because the purported consciousness of guilt evidence was a minor component of the People's case and the court's charge as a whole provided the jury with sufficient guidance on how to evaluate this evidence (see, People v. Johnson, 239 A.D.2d 123,lv denied 90 N.Y.2d 906).

We have considered and rejected defendant's remaining claims, including those contained in his pro se supplemental brief.