People v. Gilbert

7 A.D.3d 286, 776 N.Y.S.2d 53, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6603
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 6, 2004·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

[287]*287Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan Sudolnik, J.), rendered March 1, 2002, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him to a term of 2Vs to 7 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. The totality of defendant’s interactions with the other persons present warrants the conclusion that defendant was a participant in the drug transaction, whose role, at a minimum, consisted of evaluating the undercover officer as a prospective purchaser (see People v Bello, 92 NY2d 523 [1998]).

Testimony that at the time of his arrest defendant was in possession of an unspecified amount of money that was not prerecorded buy money could not have caused any prejudice. Defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would reject them. Concur—Tom. J.P., Saxe, Lerner, Marlow and Gonzalez, JJ.

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

People v. Gilbert, 7 A.D.3d 286, 776 N.Y.S.2d 53, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6603 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

7 A.D.3d 286 (People v. Gilbert) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Gortspujuls
44 A.D.3d 368 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
People v. Cuthrell
13 A.D.3d 1224 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)