People v. Fraction

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Fraction

170 A.D.2d 1030, 566 N.Y.S.2d 114, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1774

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

DecidedFebruary 1, 1991

StatusPublished

This text of 170 A.D.2d 1030 (People v. Fraction) 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. Fraction, 170 A.D.2d 1030, 566 N.Y.S.2d 114, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1774 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We conclude, upon our review of the record, that the nonjury guilty verdict was not contrary to the weight of evidence. At trial, the defense attempted to cast doubt upon the testimony of police witnesses identifying defendant as the person who sold cocaine to an undercover officer by suggesting that the perpetrator was defendant’s father, not the defendant. Both the undercover officer who was involved in the transaction and a member of the surveillance team positively identified defendant as the perpetrator and further testified that they knew defendant from previous encounters. The testimony of defendant, his sister and his cousin presented credibility issues; we perceive no reason on this record to disturb the trial court’s resolution of those issues. (Appeal from Judgment of Monroe County Court, Maloy, J.—Criminal Sale Controlled Substance, 3rd Degree.) Present—Denman, J. P., Boomer, Pine, Balio and Lawton, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We conclude, upon our review of the record, that the nonjury guilty verdict was not contrary to the weight of evidence. At trial, the defense attempted to cast doubt upon the testimony of police witnesses identifying defendant as the person who sold cocaine to an undercover officer by suggesting that the perpetrator was defendant’s father, not the defendant. Both the undercover officer who was involved in the transaction and a member of the surveillance team positively identified defendant as the perpetrator and further testified that they knew defendant from previous encounters. The testimony of defendant, his sister and his cousin presented credibility issues; we perceive no reason on this record to disturb the trial court’s resolution of those issues. (Appeal from Judgment of Monroe County Court, Maloy, J.—Criminal Sale Controlled Substance, 3rd Degree.) Present—Denman, J. P., Boomer, Pine, Balio and Lawton, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

170 A.D.2d 1030, 566 N.Y.S.2d 114, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1774, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-fraction-nyappdiv-1991.