People v. Foggie

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Foggie

57 A.D.2d 964, 395 N.Y.S.2d 68, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12247

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

DecidedMay 31, 1977

StatusPublished

This text of 57 A.D.2d 964 (People v. Foggie) 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. Foggie, 57 A.D.2d 964, 395 N.Y.S.2d 68, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12247 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered April 28, 1975 (the date on the clerk’s extract is July 2, 1975), convicting her of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. The jury pool, when defendant-appellant was tried, consisted of approximately 20% women. The jury panel contained eight men and four women. Although a higher percentage of women in the jury pool is desirable, the composition at the time of defendant’s trial was not at an impermissible level (see People v Parks, 41 NY2d 36). In the light of the overwhelming proof of guilt, the errors complained of were harmless and did not deprive defendant of a fair trial (see People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230). Her contention that the sentencing provisions of the narcotics statutes are unconstitutional as applied, to her is without merit (see People v Broadie, 37 NY2d 100, cert den 423 US 950). Cohalan, J. P., Damiani, Rabin and Titone, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, rendered April 28, 1975 (the date on the clerk’s extract is July 2, 1975), convicting her of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Judgment affirmed. The jury pool, when defendant-appellant was tried, consisted of approximately 20% women. The jury panel contained eight men and four women. Although a higher percentage of women in the jury pool is desirable, the composition at the time of defendant’s trial was not at an impermissible level (see People v Parks, 41 NY2d 36). In the light of the overwhelming proof of guilt, the errors complained of were harmless and did not deprive defendant of a fair trial (see People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230). Her contention that the sentencing provisions of the narcotics statutes are unconstitutional as applied, to her is without merit (see People v Broadie, 37 NY2d 100, cert den 423 US 950). Cohalan, J. P., Damiani, Rabin and Titone, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

57 A.D.2d 964, 395 N.Y.S.2d 68, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12247, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-foggie-nyappdiv-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack