People v. Jossiah

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Jossiah

262 A.D.2d 658, 691 N.Y.S.2d 352, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7576

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

DecidedJune 28, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 262 A.D.2d 658 (People v. Jossiah) 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. Jossiah, 262 A.D.2d 658, 691 N.Y.S.2d 352, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7576 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from á judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (J. Goldberg, J.), rendered November 19, 1996, convicting him of 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 did not preserve for appellate review his contention that the People failed to prove that he knew the weight of the controlled substances upon which his conviction of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree was based (see, People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10, 26; People v Hill, 85 NY2d 256; People v Oakman, 215 AD2d 596) and we decline to reach it in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. S. Miller, J. P., Santucci, Thompson and Smith, JJ., concur.

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

—Appeal by the defendant from á judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (J. Goldberg, J.), rendered November 19, 1996, convicting him of 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 did not preserve for appellate review his contention that the People failed to prove that he knew the weight of the controlled substances upon which his conviction of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree was based (see, People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10, 26; People v Hill, 85 NY2d 256; People v Oakman, 215 AD2d 596) and we decline to reach it in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. S. Miller, J. P., Santucci, Thompson and Smith, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

262 A.D.2d 658, 691 N.Y.S.2d 352, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7576, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-jossiah-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack