Memorandum:
On appeal from a judgment convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (Penal Law § 265.02) and two counts of attempted assault in the second degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 120.05, [7]), defendant contends that the verdict is not supported by legally sufficient evidence. That contention lacks merit. The record establishes that defendant used a pen and pencil in a menacing manner and attempted to stab an officer with the pen. Thus, we conclude that the pen and pencil constituted dangerous instruments because they were used "in a manner which render[ed them] readily capable of causing serious physical injury" ( People v Carter, 53 NY2d 113, 116; see also, People v White, 167 AD2d 870, lv denied 77 NY2d 845). Contrary to defendant's contention, we also conclude tha t the evidence is legally sufficient to satisfy the requirement of intent to cause physical injury ( see, People v Paris, 189 AD2d 589, lv denied 81 NY2d 975).
We conclude that the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence ( see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495) and tha t the sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe. We have examined the issues raised by defendant in his pro se supple-mental brief and conclude that they lack merit. (Appeal from Judgment of Oneida County Court, Mulroy, J."Criminal Possession Weapon, 3rd Degree.)