People v. Gonzales

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Gonzales

305 A.D.2d 614, 759 N.Y.S.2d 360, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5663

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

DecidedMay 19, 2003

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 305 A.D.2d 614 (People v. Gonzales) 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. Gonzales, 305 A.D.2d 614, 759 N.Y.S.2d 360, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5663 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Latella, J.), rendered November 7, 2001, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defense attorney’s cross-examination of the undercover officer justified the People’s subsequent questioning of the officer on redirect examination (see generally People v Melendez, 55 NY2d 445, 451 [1982]; People v Johnson, 296 AD2d 422 [2002], lv denied 99 NY2d 537 [2002]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Altman, J.P., McGinity, Luciano and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Latella, J.), rendered November 7, 2001, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defense attorney’s cross-examination of the undercover officer justified the People’s subsequent questioning of the officer on redirect examination (see generally People v Melendez, 55 NY2d 445, 451 [1982]; People v Johnson, 296 AD2d 422 [2002], lv denied 99 NY2d 537 [2002]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Altman, J.P., McGinity, Luciano and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

305 A.D.2d 614, 759 N.Y.S.2d 360, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5663, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-gonzales-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack