People v. Acosta

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Acosta

284 A.D.2d 219, 726 N.Y.S.2d 551, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6514

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

DecidedJune 19, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 284 A.D.2d 219 (People v. Acosta) 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. Acosta, 284 A.D.2d 219, 726 N.Y.S.2d 551, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6514 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael Obús, J.), rendered May 26, 1999, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third and fourth degrees, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to three concurrent terms of 6 to 12 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. The evidence provided reasonable assurances of the identity and unchanged condition of the substance that was sold to the undercover officer (see, People v Julian, 41 NY2d 340), and there is no basis upon which to disturb the jury’s determination that the substance sold by defendant to the undercover officer was, in fact, cocaine.

We perceive no basis for reduction of sentence.

Defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would reject them. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Williams, Tom, Wallach and Friedman, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael Obús, J.), rendered May 26, 1999, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third and fourth degrees, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to three concurrent terms of 6 to 12 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. The evidence provided reasonable assurances of the identity and unchanged condition of the substance that was sold to the undercover officer (see, People v Julian, 41 NY2d 340), and there is no basis upon which to disturb the jury’s determination that the substance sold by defendant to the undercover officer was, in fact, cocaine.

We perceive no basis for reduction of sentence.

Defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would reject them. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Williams, Tom, Wallach and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

284 A.D.2d 219, 726 N.Y.S.2d 551, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6514, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-acosta-nyappdiv-2001.