People v. Greene

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Greene

303 A.D.2d 521, 756 N.Y.S.2d 447

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

DecidedMarch 10, 2003

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 303 A.D.2d 521 (People v. Greene) 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. Greene, 303 A.D.2d 521, 756 N.Y.S.2d 447 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County [522]*522(Mullen, J.), dated April 20, 2000, 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 defendant’s contention that the People failed to disprove the agency defense beyond a reasonable doubt is without merit. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to disprove the defendant’s claim that he was acting as an agent of the undercover officer in the narcotics transaction (see People v Herring, 83 NY2d 780 [1994]; People v Lam Lek Chong, 45 NY2d 64 [1978], cert denied 439 US 935 [1978]; People v Tomlinson, 280 AD2d 563 [2001]; People v Shands, 269 AD2d 613 [2000]; People v Trotty, 262 AD2d 337 [1999]; People v Leybovich, 201 AD2d 670 [1994]). Furthermore, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Altman, J.P., Krausman, McGinity and Cozier, 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, Suffolk County [522]*522(Mullen, J.), dated April 20, 2000, 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 defendant’s contention that the People failed to disprove the agency defense beyond a reasonable doubt is without merit. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to disprove the defendant’s claim that he was acting as an agent of the undercover officer in the narcotics transaction (see People v Herring, 83 NY2d 780 [1994]; People v Lam Lek Chong, 45 NY2d 64 [1978], cert denied 439 US 935 [1978]; People v Tomlinson, 280 AD2d 563 [2001]; People v Shands, 269 AD2d 613 [2000]; People v Trotty, 262 AD2d 337 [1999]; People v Leybovich, 201 AD2d 670 [1994]). Furthermore, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Altman, J.P., Krausman, McGinity and Cozier, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

303 A.D.2d 521, 756 N.Y.S.2d 447, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-greene-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack