People v. Houston

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Houston

237 A.D.2d 205, 655 N.Y.S.2d 930, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2769

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

DecidedMarch 25, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 237 A.D.2d 205 (People v. Houston) 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. Houston, 237 A.D.2d 205, 655 N.Y.S.2d 930, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2769 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Juanita Bing Newton, J.), rendered December 13, 1993, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of two counts of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of to 11 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Issues relating to the reliability of the identification testimony of the observing officer were properly presented to the jury and we see no reason to disturb its findings.

The court properly excluded the testimony of a proposed defense witness. Defendant’s offer of proof did not establish that this testimony would have any relevance. Concur—Ellerin, J. P., Nardelli, Rubin and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Juanita Bing Newton, J.), rendered December 13, 1993, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of two counts of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of to 11 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Issues relating to the reliability of the identification testimony of the observing officer were properly presented to the jury and we see no reason to disturb its findings.

The court properly excluded the testimony of a proposed defense witness. Defendant’s offer of proof did not establish that this testimony would have any relevance. Concur—Ellerin, J. P., Nardelli, Rubin and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

237 A.D.2d 205, 655 N.Y.S.2d 930, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2769, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-houston-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack