People v. Acevedo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Acevedo

151 A.D.2d 583, 543 N.Y.S.2d 920, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7893

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 12, 1989

StatusPublished

This text of 151 A.D.2d 583 (People v. Acevedo) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Acevedo, 151 A.D.2d 583, 543 N.Y.S.2d 920, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7893 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Fisher, J.), rendered October 13, 1987, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant was convicted of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree primarily upon the testimony of the undercover police officer to whom he sold the controlled substance. Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution (People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant failed to object to the allegedly prejudicial effect of certain statements made during the prosecutor’s summation (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Nuccie, 57 NY2d 818; People v Baldo, 107 AD2d 751). In any event, the defendant’s contentions are without merit (see, People v Martin, 112 AD2d 387; People v Lopez, 104 AD2d 904). The defendant’s argument that there was a pattern of improper questioning by the prosecutor is similarly not supported by the record and without merit. Brown, J. P., Kooper, Harwood and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Fisher, J.), rendered October 13, 1987, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant was convicted of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree primarily upon the testimony of the undercover police officer to whom he sold the controlled substance. Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution (People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant failed to object to the allegedly prejudicial effect of certain statements made during the prosecutor’s summation (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Nuccie, 57 NY2d 818; People v Baldo, 107 AD2d 751). In any event, the defendant’s contentions are without merit (see, People v Martin, 112 AD2d 387; People v Lopez, 104 AD2d 904). The defendant’s argument that there was a pattern of improper questioning by the prosecutor is similarly not supported by the record and without merit. Brown, J. P., Kooper, Harwood and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

151 A.D.2d 583, 543 N.Y.S.2d 920, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7893, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-acevedo-nyappdiv-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack