People v. Graham

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Graham

4 A.D.3d 225, 771 N.Y.S.2d 660

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

DecidedFebruary 24, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 4 A.D.3d 225 (People v. Graham) 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. Graham, 4 A.D.3d 225, 771 N.Y.S.2d 660 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Rosalyn Richter, J.), rendered December 18, 2002, 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 5 to 10 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Defendant’s course of conduct warranted the conclusion that he participated in the drug transaction as a steerer and screener of potential customers (see People v Bello, 92 NY2d 523 [1998]).

The court properly declined to give an agency charge. There was no reasonable view of the evidence, viewed most favorably to defendant, that he was acting on behalf of the buyer (see People v Herring, 83 NY2d 780 [1994]; People v Vaughan, 300 AD2d 104 [2002], lv denied 99 NY2d 633 [2003]). Concur— Buckley, EJ., Nardelli, Sullivan and Lerner, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Rosalyn Richter, J.), rendered December 18, 2002, 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 5 to 10 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Defendant’s course of conduct warranted the conclusion that he participated in the drug transaction as a steerer and screener of potential customers (see People v Bello, 92 NY2d 523 [1998]).

The court properly declined to give an agency charge. There was no reasonable view of the evidence, viewed most favorably to defendant, that he was acting on behalf of the buyer (see People v Herring, 83 NY2d 780 [1994]; People v Vaughan, 300 AD2d 104 [2002], lv denied 99 NY2d 633 [2003]). Concur— Buckley, EJ., Nardelli, Sullivan and Lerner, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 A.D.3d 225, 771 N.Y.S.2d 660, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-graham-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack