In People v. Chiddick (8 NY3d 445, 447, 866 NE2d 1039, 834 NYS2d 710 [2007]), the Court of Appeals specified which "factual aspects of a case" to examine in order to decide whether the evidence is sufficient to establish substantial pain. Significantly, the "most important" factual aspect is "the injury defendant inflicted, viewed objectively" (id.). Nonetheless, the victim's subjective description of what he experienced is also important (id.). The Court opined that sometimes an objective account of the injury, without testimony about the victim's subjective experience, will be sufficient to support a finding of substantial pain, but that sometimes it will not (id.). Conspicuously, the Court did not suggest in the alternative that testimony about the victim's subjective experience, without an objective account of the injury, would be enough under any circumstance to establish substantial pain. Additionally relevant is whether the victim sought medical treatment for the injury inflicted, since that implies the pain was significant (see id.).