People v. Marrero

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Marrero

161 A.D.2d 484, 555 N.Y.S.2d 749, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6215

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

DecidedMay 24, 1990

StatusPublished

This text of 161 A.D.2d 484 (People v. Marrero) 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. Marrero, 161 A.D.2d 484, 555 N.Y.S.2d 749, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6215 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, [485]*485Bronx County (Joan Sudolnik, J.), rendered March 15, 1988, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to an indeterminate prison term of from 5 to 10 years, is unanimously affirmed.

While two undercover officers were participating in a "buy and bust” operation, defendant approached one of the officers and asked her if she was looking for some heroin. The officer said yes and gave defendant $20 for the drugs. Defendant left to retrieve the heroin from a building and returned and gave it to the officer. The other officer was able to watch the entire transaction from nearby. The officers immediately notified their backup team of defendant’s description and location, and defendant was apprehended and arrested after he was identified by the officers.

On appeal defendant raises issues regarding the prosecutor’s summation and the trial court’s instructions to the jury. These claims are unpreserved as a matter of law and we thus decline to address them (CPL 470.05 [2]). However, were we to consider these issues in the interest of justice, we would, nevertheless, find them to be without merit. The prosecutor’s comments were fair responses to the defense case (People v Ashwal, 39 NY2d 105) and the court’s charge was strikingly similar to language that has been held to be proper (see, People v Malloy, 55 NY2d 296, 300, cert denied 459 US 847).

Defendant asserts that his sentence is excessive and unduly harsh. However, defendant has maintained a persistent involvement in illegal activities and has shown a flagrant disregard for lawful behavior. We perceive no abuse of discretion warranting a reduction in sentence. (See, People v Farrar, 52 NY2d 302, 305.) Concur—Ross, J. P., Rosenberger, Ellerin and Wallach, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, [485]*485Bronx County (Joan Sudolnik, J.), rendered March 15, 1988, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to an indeterminate prison term of from 5 to 10 years, is unanimously affirmed.

While two undercover officers were participating in a "buy and bust” operation, defendant approached one of the officers and asked her if she was looking for some heroin. The officer said yes and gave defendant $20 for the drugs. Defendant left to retrieve the heroin from a building and returned and gave it to the officer. The other officer was able to watch the entire transaction from nearby. The officers immediately notified their backup team of defendant’s description and location, and defendant was apprehended and arrested after he was identified by the officers.

On appeal defendant raises issues regarding the prosecutor’s summation and the trial court’s instructions to the jury. These claims are unpreserved as a matter of law and we thus decline to address them (CPL 470.05 [2]). However, were we to consider these issues in the interest of justice, we would, nevertheless, find them to be without merit. The prosecutor’s comments were fair responses to the defense case (People v Ashwal, 39 NY2d 105) and the court’s charge was strikingly similar to language that has been held to be proper (see, People v Malloy, 55 NY2d 296, 300, cert denied 459 US 847).

Defendant asserts that his sentence is excessive and unduly harsh. However, defendant has maintained a persistent involvement in illegal activities and has shown a flagrant disregard for lawful behavior. We perceive no abuse of discretion warranting a reduction in sentence. (See, People v Farrar, 52 NY2d 302, 305.) Concur—Ross, J. P., Rosenberger, Ellerin and Wallach, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

161 A.D.2d 484, 555 N.Y.S.2d 749, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6215, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-marrero-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack