People v. Chavel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Chavel

161 A.D.2d 413

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

DecidedMay 15, 1990

StatusPublished

This text of 161 A.D.2d 413 (People v. Chavel) 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. Chavel, 161 A.D.2d 413 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira F. Beal, J.), rendered August 4, 1987, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and criminally using drug paraphernalia in the second degree and sentencing him to concurrent terms of imprisonment of 15 years to life, 1 to 3 years, and one year, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

As the result of a search pursuant to a warrant which was obtained by a special agent of the Drug Enforcement Administration, based upon information supplied by a confidential informant, a firearm, drug paraphernalia and approximately one kilogram of cocaine were recovered from the defendant’s apartment. The cocaine was recovered from beneath defendant’s bed. The evidence, which was not refuted by the defendant, clearly supported the inference that the cocaine belonged to him, although it was suggested by him that it was planted. Knowledge of the nature of the possessed substance may be shown circumstantially (People v Reisman, 29 NY2d 278, 285). "Generally, possession suffices to permit the inference that the possessor knows what he possesses, especially, but not exclusively, if it is in his hands, on his person, in his vehicle, or on his premises” (supra, at 285). The claims raised by defendant in his supplemental pro se brief have been reviewed and found to be without merit. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Ross, Ellerin, Wallach and Smith, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira F. Beal, J.), rendered August 4, 1987, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and criminally using drug paraphernalia in the second degree and sentencing him to concurrent terms of imprisonment of 15 years to life, 1 to 3 years, and one year, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

As the result of a search pursuant to a warrant which was obtained by a special agent of the Drug Enforcement Administration, based upon information supplied by a confidential informant, a firearm, drug paraphernalia and approximately one kilogram of cocaine were recovered from the defendant’s apartment. The cocaine was recovered from beneath defendant’s bed. The evidence, which was not refuted by the defendant, clearly supported the inference that the cocaine belonged to him, although it was suggested by him that it was planted. Knowledge of the nature of the possessed substance may be shown circumstantially (People v Reisman, 29 NY2d 278, 285). "Generally, possession suffices to permit the inference that the possessor knows what he possesses, especially, but not exclusively, if it is in his hands, on his person, in his vehicle, or on his premises” (supra, at 285). The claims raised by defendant in his supplemental pro se brief have been reviewed and found to be without merit. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Ross, Ellerin, Wallach and Smith, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

161 A.D.2d 413, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-chavel-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack