People v. Lemons

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Lemons

282 A.D.2d 211, 722 N.Y.S.2d 381, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3358

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

DecidedApril 3, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 282 A.D.2d 211 (People v. Lemons) 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. Lemons, 282 A.D.2d 211, 722 N.Y.S.2d 381, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3358 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Laura Visitacion-Lewis, J.), rendered September 15, 1999, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third and fifth degrees, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 4V2 to 9 years, 4V2 to 9 years and 2 to 4 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis upon which to disturb the jury’s determinations concerning credibility.

Defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment on the ground that he was deprived of his opportunity to appear before the Grand Jury was properly denied as untimely (CPL 190.50 [5] [c]). The present record fails to support defendant’s related ineffective assistance claim.

We have considered and rejected defendant’s remaining claims, including those contained in his pro se supplemental brief. Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Tom, Andrias, Rubin and Saxe, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Laura Visitacion-Lewis, J.), rendered September 15, 1999, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third and fifth degrees, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 4V2 to 9 years, 4V2 to 9 years and 2 to 4 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis upon which to disturb the jury’s determinations concerning credibility.

Defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment on the ground that he was deprived of his opportunity to appear before the Grand Jury was properly denied as untimely (CPL 190.50 [5] [c]). The present record fails to support defendant’s related ineffective assistance claim.

We have considered and rejected defendant’s remaining claims, including those contained in his pro se supplemental brief. Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Tom, Andrias, Rubin and Saxe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

282 A.D.2d 211, 722 N.Y.S.2d 381, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3358, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-lemons-nyappdiv-2001.