People v. Bedell

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Bedell

114 A.D.3d 1153, 979 N.Y.S.2d 892

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

DecidedFebruary 7, 2014

StatusPublished

This text of 114 A.D.3d 1153 (People v. Bedell) 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. Bedell, 114 A.D.3d 1153, 979 N.Y.S.2d 892 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (John Lewis DeMarco, J), rendered February 9, 2011. The judgment convicted defendant, after a nonjury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, after a nonjury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree (Penal Law § 220.06 [1]). Defendant contends that defense counsel was ineffective for failing to move to suppress the currency found on defendant during a search incident to his arrest, as well as a paper bag hidden near a guardrail at the end of a dead-end street that contained 13 “dime bags” of crack cocaine. Defendant failed to demonstrate that the “ ‘motion, if made, would have been successful and that defense counsel’s failure to make that motion deprived him of meaningful representation’ ” (People v Bassett, 55 AD3d 1434, 1437-1438 [2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 922 [2009]; see generally People v Rivera, 71 NY2d 705, 709 [1988]).

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621 [1983]), we reject defendant’s contention that the evidence is legally insufficient to establish that he possessed the cocaine with intent to sell it (see People v Freeman, 28 AD3d 1161, 1162 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d [1154]*1154788 [2006]; People v Smith, 217 AD2d 910, 911 [1995]; see generally People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). Contrary to defendant’s further contention, viewing the evidence in light of the elements of the crime in this nonjury trial (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 349 [2007]), we conclude that the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see generally Bleakley, 69 NY2d at 495). Present — Scudder, PJ., Fahey, Peradotto, Carni and Valentino, JJ.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (John Lewis DeMarco, J), rendered February 9, 2011. The judgment convicted defendant, after a nonjury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, after a nonjury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree (Penal Law § 220.06 [1]). Defendant contends that defense counsel was ineffective for failing to move to suppress the currency found on defendant during a search incident to his arrest, as well as a paper bag hidden near a guardrail at the end of a dead-end street that contained 13 “dime bags” of crack cocaine. Defendant failed to demonstrate that the “ ‘motion, if made, would have been successful and that defense counsel’s failure to make that motion deprived him of meaningful representation’ ” (People v Bassett, 55 AD3d 1434, 1437-1438 [2008], lv denied 11 NY3d 922 [2009]; see generally People v Rivera, 71 NY2d 705, 709 [1988]).

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621 [1983]), we reject defendant’s contention that the evidence is legally insufficient to establish that he possessed the cocaine with intent to sell it (see People v Freeman, 28 AD3d 1161, 1162 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d [1154]*1154788 [2006]; People v Smith, 217 AD2d 910, 911 [1995]; see generally People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). Contrary to defendant’s further contention, viewing the evidence in light of the elements of the crime in this nonjury trial (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 349 [2007]), we conclude that the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see generally Bleakley, 69 NY2d at 495). Present — Scudder, PJ., Fahey, Peradotto, Carni and Valentino, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

114 A.D.3d 1153, 979 N.Y.S.2d 892, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-bedell-nyappdiv-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack