People v. Figueroa

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Figueroa

200 A.D.2d 546, 606 N.Y.S.2d 700, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 654

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

DecidedJanuary 27, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 200 A.D.2d 546 (People v. Figueroa) 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. Figueroa, 200 A.D.2d 546, 606 N.Y.S.2d 700, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 654 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Budd Goodman, J.), rendered January 31, 1992, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third [547]*547degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 6 to 12 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s claim that he was denied a fair trial because the trial court did not charge the jury on agency is unpreserved as a matter of law (CPL 470.05 [2]), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. If we were to review it, we would find that no reasonable view of the evidence could support a finding that defendant acted as the undercover officer’s agent in this "buy and bust” operation, and that there was thus no basis for the charge.

We have reviewed defendant’s other claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and abuse of sentencing discretion, and find them to be without merit. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Wallach, Kupferman and Tom, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Budd Goodman, J.), rendered January 31, 1992, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third [547]*547degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 6 to 12 years, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s claim that he was denied a fair trial because the trial court did not charge the jury on agency is unpreserved as a matter of law (CPL 470.05 [2]), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. If we were to review it, we would find that no reasonable view of the evidence could support a finding that defendant acted as the undercover officer’s agent in this "buy and bust” operation, and that there was thus no basis for the charge.

We have reviewed defendant’s other claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and abuse of sentencing discretion, and find them to be without merit. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Wallach, Kupferman and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

200 A.D.2d 546, 606 N.Y.S.2d 700, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 654, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-figueroa-nyappdiv-1994.