People v. Booker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Booker

20 A.D.3d 485, 797 N.Y.S.2d 764, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7738

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 11, 2005·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Gazzillo, J.), rendered February 10, 2003, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant was videotaped selling crack cocaine to a purchaser who told police he knew the defendant from previous drug transactions over a two-year period. Under these circumstances, no notice pursuant to CPL 710.30 was required, because the identification was confirmatory in nature (see People v Tas, 51 NY2d 915, 916 [1980]).

[486] Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), 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 (see CPL 470.15 [5]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]). H. Miller, J.P., Goldstein, Crane and Skelos, 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 County Court, Suffolk County (Gazzillo, J.), rendered February 10, 2003, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant was videotaped selling crack cocaine to a purchaser who told police he knew the defendant from previous drug transactions over a two-year period. Under these circumstances, no notice pursuant to CPL 710.30 was required, because the identification was confirmatory in nature (see People v Tas, 51 NY2d 915, 916 [1980]).

[486] Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), 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 (see CPL 470.15 [5]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]). H. Miller, J.P., Goldstein, Crane and Skelos, JJ., concur.

People v. Booker, 20 A.D.3d 485, 797 N.Y.S.2d 764, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7738 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

20 A.D.3d 485 (People v. Booker) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related