People v. Flecha

161 A.D.2d 116, 554 N.Y.S.2d 845, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4865
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 1, 1990
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 161 A.D.2d 116 (People v. Flecha) 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. Flecha, 161 A.D.2d 116, 554 N.Y.S.2d 845, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4865 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Vincent Vitale, J.), rendered July 8, 1987, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts) and sentencing him as a second felony offender to concurrent indeterminate terms of 5 to 10 years, unanimously affirmed.

On September 22, 1986, defendant was arrested within minutes of selling narcotics to an undercover police officer. Defendant now claims on appeal that he was denied a fair trial by the court’s reference to "reasonable person” in its reasonable doubt charge and the court’s query "who speaks the truth” at the end of its charge. However, since these objections were not raised at trial, they are unpreserved for appellate review (CPL 470.05). Were we to review these issues in the interest of justice, we would nonetheless affirm, since [117]*117the court’s charge as a whole adequately conveyed the concepts of reasonable doubt and the prosecutor’s burden of proof (People v Coleman, 70 NY2d 817, 819; People v Malloy, 55 NY2d 296, 303).

Furthermore, we are unpersuaded that the sentence imposed was unduly harsh or severe. Taking into account, "among other things, the crime charged, the particular circumstances of the individual before the court and the purpose of a penal sanction”, we perceive no abuse of discretion warranting a reduction in sentence (People v Farrar, 52 NY2d 302, 305). Concur—Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Milonas, Rosenberger and Asch, JJ.

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

Related

Lugo v. Kuhlmann
68 F. Supp. 2d 347 (S.D. New York, 1999)
Avincola v. Stinson
60 F. Supp. 2d 133 (S.D. New York, 1999)
People v. Hill
209 A.D.2d 224 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)
People v. Caldwell
196 A.D.2d 760 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
People v. Rawls
187 A.D.2d 353 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
People v. Rosa
187 A.D.2d 355 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
People v. Molina
187 A.D.2d 356 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
People v. Moore
185 A.D.2d 251 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
People v. Antommarchi
176 A.D.2d 104 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)
People v. White
173 A.D.2d 882 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)
People v. Jones
173 A.D.2d 487 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)
People v. Kelly
164 A.D.2d 767 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)
People v. Arroyo
162 A.D.2d 359 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
161 A.D.2d 116, 554 N.Y.S.2d 845, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4865, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-flecha-nyappdiv-1990.