People v. Berrios

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Berrios

216 A.D.2d 28, 628 N.Y.S.2d 266, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6047

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

DecidedJune 6, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 216 A.D.2d 28 (People v. Berrios) 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. Berrios, 216 A.D.2d 28, 628 N.Y.S.2d 266, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6047 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Phylis Skloot Bamberger, J.), rendered April 7,1993, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 41/2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

When defendant suggested, on cross-examination, that his possession of prerecorded buy money, consisting of a $20 bill, could be explained by the theory that he received the bill as "change” from the purported actual seller, this opened the door to evidence, with proper limiting instructions, that defendant possessed 57 additional $20 bills, since such tended to negate defendant’s claim that he obtained the prerecorded bill by mere accident or happenstance (People v Molineux, 168 NY 264, 293). First, the money naturally suggested that defendant was present as a seller, not a buyer. Second, proof that defendant had numerous $20 bills available made it improbable that he used a larger bill to make his purchase and got the prerecorded twenty as change.

In any event, any error in the receipt of this evidence was harmless in view of the overwhelming evidence of guilt. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rubin, Ross, Nardelli and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Phylis Skloot Bamberger, J.), rendered April 7,1993, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 41/2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

When defendant suggested, on cross-examination, that his possession of prerecorded buy money, consisting of a $20 bill, could be explained by the theory that he received the bill as "change” from the purported actual seller, this opened the door to evidence, with proper limiting instructions, that defendant possessed 57 additional $20 bills, since such tended to negate defendant’s claim that he obtained the prerecorded bill by mere accident or happenstance (People v Molineux, 168 NY 264, 293). First, the money naturally suggested that defendant was present as a seller, not a buyer. Second, proof that defendant had numerous $20 bills available made it improbable that he used a larger bill to make his purchase and got the prerecorded twenty as change.

In any event, any error in the receipt of this evidence was harmless in view of the overwhelming evidence of guilt. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rubin, Ross, Nardelli and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

216 A.D.2d 28, 628 N.Y.S.2d 266, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6047, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-berrios-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack