People v. Leguillon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Leguillon

119 A.D.2d 590, 500 N.Y.S.2d 1003, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55524

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

DecidedApril 7, 1986

StatusPublished

This text of 119 A.D.2d 590 (People v. Leguillon) 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. Leguillon, 119 A.D.2d 590, 500 N.Y.S.2d 1003, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55524 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hayes, J.), rendered May 21, 1985, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

A review of the evidence adduced at trial shows that the defendant failed to establish the affirmative defense of entrapment by a preponderance of the evidence (see, Penal Law § 25.00 [2]). Thus, the jury’s decision on this issue should not be disturbed (see, People v McGee, 49 NY2d 48, 61, cert denied sub nom. Waters v New York, 446 US 942; People v Zaloga, 114 AD2d 871).

We have examined the defendant’s other contentions and find them to be without merit. Thompson, J. P., Bracken, Weinstein and Kunzeman, 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, Kings County (Hayes, J.), rendered May 21, 1985, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

A review of the evidence adduced at trial shows that the defendant failed to establish the affirmative defense of entrapment by a preponderance of the evidence (see, Penal Law § 25.00 [2]). Thus, the jury’s decision on this issue should not be disturbed (see, People v McGee, 49 NY2d 48, 61, cert denied sub nom. Waters v New York, 446 US 942; People v Zaloga, 114 AD2d 871).

We have examined the defendant’s other contentions and find them to be without merit. Thompson, J. P., Bracken, Weinstein and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

119 A.D.2d 590, 500 N.Y.S.2d 1003, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55524, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-leguillon-nyappdiv-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack