People v. Felix

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Felix

256 A.D.2d 135, 682 N.Y.S.2d 162, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13771

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

DecidedDecember 15, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 256 A.D.2d 135 (People v. Felix) 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. Felix, 256 A.D.2d 135, 682 N.Y.S.2d 162, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13771 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan Sudolnik, J.), rendered April 12, 1996, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal [136]*136sale of a controlled substance in the first degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree, and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 15 years to life, 15 years to life and 44/2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490). Issues of credibility were properly presented to the jury and we find no reason to disturb its determination.

Defendant failed to pursue his initial request that the confidential informant be produced or identified and sought only a missing witness instruction, which the court provided. Therefore, we conclude that defendant abandoned his claim that the informant should have been produced or that her identity should have been disclosed on the ground that she could have provided purportedly crucial testimony supporting the agency defense (see, People v Medina, 53 NY2d 951).

Defendant’s omnibus motion, when read as a whole, made no allegation that the defendant’s arrest was unlawful and 'thus defendant was not entitled to a Dunaway hearing. Concur— Lerner, P. J., Sullivan, Milonas, Rosenberger and Ellerin, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan Sudolnik, J.), rendered April 12, 1996, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal [136]*136sale of a controlled substance in the first degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree, and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 15 years to life, 15 years to life and 44/2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490). Issues of credibility were properly presented to the jury and we find no reason to disturb its determination.

Defendant failed to pursue his initial request that the confidential informant be produced or identified and sought only a missing witness instruction, which the court provided. Therefore, we conclude that defendant abandoned his claim that the informant should have been produced or that her identity should have been disclosed on the ground that she could have provided purportedly crucial testimony supporting the agency defense (see, People v Medina, 53 NY2d 951).

Defendant’s omnibus motion, when read as a whole, made no allegation that the defendant’s arrest was unlawful and 'thus defendant was not entitled to a Dunaway hearing. Concur— Lerner, P. J., Sullivan, Milonas, Rosenberger and Ellerin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

256 A.D.2d 135, 682 N.Y.S.2d 162, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13771, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-felix-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack