People v. Graham

299 A.D.2d 293, 749 N.Y.S.2d 722, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11515
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Graham. Read the opinion of the Court — 283 A.D.2d 885

Opinion

The court’s verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. The People disproved defendant’s agency defense beyond a reasonable [294]*294doubt (see People v Herring, 83 NY2d 780). The evidence, viewed as a whole, clearly warranted the conclusion that defendant was a participant in the drug-selling operation and had a working relationship with the other participant. Moreover, “there was no evidence that defendant had any other reason to risk arrest by assisting a total stranger in purchasing drugs” (People v Elvy, 277 AD2d 80, lv denied 96 NY2d 783). There is no basis for disturbing the court’s determinations concerning the undercover officer’s credibility. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Rosenberger, Rubin and Gonzalez, JJ.

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

People v. Graham, 299 A.D.2d 293, 749 N.Y.S.2d 722, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11515 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

299 A.D.2d 293 (People v. Graham) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Herring
632 N.E.2d 1272 (New York Court of Appeals, 1994)
People v. Elvy
277 A.D.2d 80 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)