People v. Garrick

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Garrick

305 A.D.2d 262, 758 N.Y.S.2d 804, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5716

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

DecidedMay 20, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 305 A.D.2d 262 (People v. Garrick) 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. Garrick, 305 A.D.2d 262, 758 N.Y.S.2d 804, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5716 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Tejada, J.), rendered October 2, 2000, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4V2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. Issues of credibility, including the ability of the officers to recall the details of the case, were properly considered by the jury and there is no basis for disturbing its determinations (see People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94 [1903]). We conclude that each of the two undercover officers had a clear recollection of the pertinent facts. Concur — Nardelli, J.P., Saxe, Sullivan, Wallach and Gonzalez, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Tejada, J.), rendered October 2, 2000, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4V2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. Issues of credibility, including the ability of the officers to recall the details of the case, were properly considered by the jury and there is no basis for disturbing its determinations (see People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94 [1903]). We conclude that each of the two undercover officers had a clear recollection of the pertinent facts. Concur — Nardelli, J.P., Saxe, Sullivan, Wallach and Gonzalez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

305 A.D.2d 262, 758 N.Y.S.2d 804, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5716, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-garrick-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack