People v. Faust

200 A.D.2d 757, 608 N.Y.S.2d 863
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Faust. Read the opinion of the Court — 235 A.D.2d 430

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Orange County (Paño Z. Patsalos, J.), rendered June 26, 1991, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence adduced at trial in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that [758]*758the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).

The sentence imposed was neither unduly harsh nor excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Sullivan, J. P., Rosenblatt, Pizzuto and Joy, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Faust, 200 A.D.2d 757, 608 N.Y.S.2d 863 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

200 A.D.2d 757 (People v. Faust) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Contes
454 N.E.2d 932 (New York Court of Appeals, 1983)
People v. Suitte
90 A.D.2d 80 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)