People v. Cox

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Cox

290 A.D.2d 385, 737 N.Y.S.2d 274, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 879

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

DecidedJanuary 31, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 290 A.D.2d 385 (People v. Cox) 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. Cox, 290 A.D.2d 385, 737 N.Y.S.2d 274, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 879 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Bruce Allen, J.), rendered June 1, 2000, 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 4V2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis upon which to disturb the jury’s determinations concerning credibility and identification. The credible testimony established that the officers who witnessed the drug transaction had a sufficient opportunity to observe defendant and that they made a reliable identification.

The court appropriately corrected and cautioned the prosecutor in response to defendant’s objection during the People’s summation. We decline to review those portions of the summation the challenges to which are unpreserved. We note, however, that none would warrant reversal. Concur — Tom, J.P., Sullivan, Rosenberger, Wallach and Buckley, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Bruce Allen, J.), rendered June 1, 2000, 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 4V2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis upon which to disturb the jury’s determinations concerning credibility and identification. The credible testimony established that the officers who witnessed the drug transaction had a sufficient opportunity to observe defendant and that they made a reliable identification.

The court appropriately corrected and cautioned the prosecutor in response to defendant’s objection during the People’s summation. We decline to review those portions of the summation the challenges to which are unpreserved. We note, however, that none would warrant reversal. Concur — Tom, J.P., Sullivan, Rosenberger, Wallach and Buckley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

290 A.D.2d 385, 737 N.Y.S.2d 274, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 879, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-cox-nyappdiv-2002.