People v. Leggett

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Leggett

1 A.D.2d 380, 766 N.Y.S.2d 866

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

DecidedNovember 3, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 1 A.D.2d 380 (People v. Leggett) 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. Leggett, 1 A.D.2d 380, 766 N.Y.S.2d 866 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (McKay, J.), rendered November 20, 2001, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant was arrested after a “buy and bust” operation [381]*381in which he and. a codefendant sold cocaine to an undercover police officer. The defendant’s request for a charge on the agency-defense was properly denied. There was no reasonable view of the evidence to support the theory that the defendant was acting solely as an agent of the undercover officer (see People v Herring, 83 NY2d 780, 782 [1994]; People v Blue, 294 AD2d 512, 513 [2002]; People v King, 283 AD2d 589, 590 [2001]; People v Alvarez, 235 AD2d 484, 484-485 [1997]).

The defendant’s remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Rosario, 195 AD2d 577 [1993]), and, in any event, does not require reversal. Ritter, J.P, Goldstein, Townes and Rivera, 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, Queens County (McKay, J.), rendered November 20, 2001, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant was arrested after a “buy and bust” operation [381]*381in which he and. a codefendant sold cocaine to an undercover police officer. The defendant’s request for a charge on the agency-defense was properly denied. There was no reasonable view of the evidence to support the theory that the defendant was acting solely as an agent of the undercover officer (see People v Herring, 83 NY2d 780, 782 [1994]; People v Blue, 294 AD2d 512, 513 [2002]; People v King, 283 AD2d 589, 590 [2001]; People v Alvarez, 235 AD2d 484, 484-485 [1997]).

The defendant’s remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Rosario, 195 AD2d 577 [1993]), and, in any event, does not require reversal. Ritter, J.P, Goldstein, Townes and Rivera, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 A.D.2d 380, 766 N.Y.S.2d 866, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-leggett-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack