People v. Frierson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Frierson

265 A.D.2d 172, 695 N.Y.S.2d 361, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9709

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

DecidedOctober 7, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 265 A.D.2d 172 (People v. Frierson) 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. Frierson, 265 A.D.2d 172, 695 N.Y.S.2d 361, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9709 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lawrence Bernstein, J.), rendered June 11, 1997, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of one count of criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds and one count of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 4x/2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

Limited expert testimony, by an officer who was also a fact [173]*173witness, concerning methods used by drug dealers to avoid being found in possession of drugs and buy money was properly admitted to explain the non-recovery of the buy money (see, People v Hunt, 249 AD2d 246, lv denied 92 NY2d 899). Such testimony did not suggest a large-scale drug conspiracy (see, People v McAllister, 255 AD2d 241, lv denied 93 NY2d 876). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Nardelli, Wallach, Andrias and Buckley, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lawrence Bernstein, J.), rendered June 11, 1997, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of one count of criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds and one count of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 4x/2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

Limited expert testimony, by an officer who was also a fact [173]*173witness, concerning methods used by drug dealers to avoid being found in possession of drugs and buy money was properly admitted to explain the non-recovery of the buy money (see, People v Hunt, 249 AD2d 246, lv denied 92 NY2d 899). Such testimony did not suggest a large-scale drug conspiracy (see, People v McAllister, 255 AD2d 241, lv denied 93 NY2d 876). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Nardelli, Wallach, Andrias and Buckley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

265 A.D.2d 172, 695 N.Y.S.2d 361, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9709, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-frierson-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack