People v. Brandon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Brandon

209 A.D.2d 997, 621 N.Y.S.2d 961, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12019

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

DecidedNovember 16, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 209 A.D.2d 997 (People v. Brandon) 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. Brandon, 209 A.D.2d 997, 621 N.Y.S.2d 961, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12019 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The jury’s rejection of defendant’s agency defense was not contrary to the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495; see also, People v Lam Lek Chong, 45 NY2d 64, cert denied 439 US 935; People v Foskit, 168 AD2d 961, lv denied 77 NY2d 877). The People proved the aggregate weight of the cocaine beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Smith, 209 AD2d 996 [decided herewith]; People v Nelson, 144 AD2d 714, 717, lv denied 73 NY2d 894; People v Konyack, 99 AD2d 588; Donnino, Practice Commentaries, McKinney’s Cons Law of NY, Book 39, Penal Law art 220, at 9-11). We reject the contention that the prosecutor’s use of a chart during summation deprived defendant of a fair trial (see, People v Galloway, 54 [998]*998NY2d 396, 401; People v Smith, supra). Defendant’s sentence is not harsh or excessive. (Appeal from Judgment of Onondaga County Court, Cunningham, J.—Conspiracy, 2nd Degree.) Present—Green, J. P., Pine, Lawton, Callahan and Doerr, JJ.

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

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The jury’s rejection of defendant’s agency defense was not contrary to the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495; see also, People v Lam Lek Chong, 45 NY2d 64, cert denied 439 US 935; People v Foskit, 168 AD2d 961, lv denied 77 NY2d 877). The People proved the aggregate weight of the cocaine beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Smith, 209 AD2d 996 [decided herewith]; People v Nelson, 144 AD2d 714, 717, lv denied 73 NY2d 894; People v Konyack, 99 AD2d 588; Donnino, Practice Commentaries, McKinney’s Cons Law of NY, Book 39, Penal Law art 220, at 9-11). We reject the contention that the prosecutor’s use of a chart during summation deprived defendant of a fair trial (see, People v Galloway, 54 [998]*998NY2d 396, 401; People v Smith, supra). Defendant’s sentence is not harsh or excessive. (Appeal from Judgment of Onondaga County Court, Cunningham, J.—Conspiracy, 2nd Degree.) Present—Green, J. P., Pine, Lawton, Callahan and Doerr, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

209 A.D.2d 997, 621 N.Y.S.2d 961, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12019, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-brandon-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack