People v. Felipe

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Felipe

158 A.D.2d 437, 551 N.Y.S.2d 530, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2101

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

DecidedFebruary 27, 1990

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 158 A.D.2d 437 (People v. Felipe) 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. Felipe, 158 A.D.2d 437, 551 N.Y.S.2d 530, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2101 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Contrary to defendant’s contention, the weight of the evidence supports the jury’s verdict. (See, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490.) Defendant has failed to establish that the testimony of the DEA agent and the confidential informant was incredible. Although the testimony at trial concerning defendant’s participation in this transaction was in conflict, it does not appear that the jury failed to give the evidence the weight it should have been accorded notwithstanding codefendant Ocasio’s acquittal.

We have considered defendant’s argument that it was error to introduce the cocaine into evidence because the People failed to establish a complete chain of custody, and find it to be without merit. The testimony at trial provided reasonable assurance that the exhibit introduced was the unchanged contraband that had been seized by the police. (People v Julian, 41 NY2d 340.) Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Rosenberger, Ellerin and Smith, JJ.

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

Contrary to defendant’s contention, the weight of the evidence supports the jury’s verdict. (See, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490.) Defendant has failed to establish that the testimony of the DEA agent and the confidential informant was incredible. Although the testimony at trial concerning defendant’s participation in this transaction was in conflict, it does not appear that the jury failed to give the evidence the weight it should have been accorded notwithstanding codefendant Ocasio’s acquittal.

We have considered defendant’s argument that it was error to introduce the cocaine into evidence because the People failed to establish a complete chain of custody, and find it to be without merit. The testimony at trial provided reasonable assurance that the exhibit introduced was the unchanged contraband that had been seized by the police. (People v Julian, 41 NY2d 340.) Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Rosenberger, Ellerin and Smith, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

158 A.D.2d 437, 551 N.Y.S.2d 530, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2101, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-felipe-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack