People v. McAllister

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. McAllister

172 A.D.2d 154, 567 N.Y.S.2d 695, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4043

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

DecidedApril 2, 1991

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 172 A.D.2d 154 (People v. McAllister) 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. McAllister, 172 A.D.2d 154, 567 N.Y.S.2d 695, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4043 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Paul Bookson, J.), rendered September 13, 1989, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and sentencing him to a term of 5 to 10 years incarceration, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s arrest arose out of a "buy and bust” operation. We find defendant’s contention that he was an agent of the undercover officer and therefore not culpable to be without merit. The issue of agency is for the jury to decide. (People v Lam Lek Chong, 45 NY2d 64, 74, cert denied 439 US 935.) Defendant personally took the undercover officer to co-defendant Vasquez and told Vasquez that the undercover officer "wants two.” Defendant acted as the conduit for the money and the drugs. As in People v Windley (78 AD2d 55, 58), "defendant’s over-all manner and actions substantiate that this was a well-choreographed, two-person drug operation, conducted by two street-wise entrepreneurs.” Concur—Milonas, J. P., Ross, Kassal, Smith and Rubin, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Paul Bookson, J.), rendered September 13, 1989, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and sentencing him to a term of 5 to 10 years incarceration, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s arrest arose out of a "buy and bust” operation. We find defendant’s contention that he was an agent of the undercover officer and therefore not culpable to be without merit. The issue of agency is for the jury to decide. (People v Lam Lek Chong, 45 NY2d 64, 74, cert denied 439 US 935.) Defendant personally took the undercover officer to co-defendant Vasquez and told Vasquez that the undercover officer "wants two.” Defendant acted as the conduit for the money and the drugs. As in People v Windley (78 AD2d 55, 58), "defendant’s over-all manner and actions substantiate that this was a well-choreographed, two-person drug operation, conducted by two street-wise entrepreneurs.” Concur—Milonas, J. P., Ross, Kassal, Smith and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

172 A.D.2d 154, 567 N.Y.S.2d 695, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4043, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mcallister-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack