People v. Burgess

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Burgess

212 A.D.2d 539, 623 N.Y.S.2d 116

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

DecidedFebruary 6, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 212 A.D.2d 539 (People v. Burgess) 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. Burgess, 212 A.D.2d 539, 623 N.Y.S.2d 116 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Barasch, J.), rendered September 22, 1992, convicting [540]*540him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his claim that it was improper for a police officer to testify to the effect that the officer assumed that the defendant intended to sell the 28 vials of crack cocaine in his possession (CPL 470.05 [2]). In any event, any error in permitting the testimony was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant’s guilt.

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Sullivan, J. P., Rosenblatt, Joy and Altman, 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 Supreme Court, Kings County (Barasch, J.), rendered September 22, 1992, convicting [540]*540him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his claim that it was improper for a police officer to testify to the effect that the officer assumed that the defendant intended to sell the 28 vials of crack cocaine in his possession (CPL 470.05 [2]). In any event, any error in permitting the testimony was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant’s guilt.

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Sullivan, J. P., Rosenblatt, Joy and Altman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

212 A.D.2d 539, 623 N.Y.S.2d 116, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-burgess-nyappdiv-1995.