People v. Davis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Davis

38 A.D.3d 212, 832 N.Y.S.2d 147

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

DecidedMarch 1, 2007

StatusPublished

This text of 38 A.D.3d 212 (People v. Davis) 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. Davis, 38 A.D.3d 212, 832 N.Y.S.2d 147 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Arlene D. Goldberg, J.), rendered May 5, 2005, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of SVa to 11 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490 [1987]). There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s determinations concerning credibility and identification. The two officers’ identifications of defendant as the seller were corroborated by evidence of prerecorded money and additional drugs found on defendant’s person. Concur—Friedman, J.E, Marlow, Sweeny, Catterson and Malone, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Arlene D. Goldberg, J.), rendered May 5, 2005, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of SVa to 11 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490 [1987]). There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s determinations concerning credibility and identification. The two officers’ identifications of defendant as the seller were corroborated by evidence of prerecorded money and additional drugs found on defendant’s person. Concur—Friedman, J.E, Marlow, Sweeny, Catterson and Malone, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 A.D.3d 212, 832 N.Y.S.2d 147, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-davis-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack