People v. McFadden

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. McFadden

17 A.D.3d 123, 791 N.Y.S.2d 821, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3460

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

DecidedApril 5, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 17 A.D.3d 123 (People v. McFadden) 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. McFadden, 17 A.D.3d 123, 791 N.Y.S.2d 821, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3460 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Dorothy Cropper, J.), rendered December 3, 2002, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts) and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to three concurrent terms of 5 to 10 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490 [1987]). Issues of credibility and identification were properly considered by the jury and there is no basis for disturbing its determinations. The officers had a sufficient opportunity to observe the transaction, and their account of the incident was plausible. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Marlow, Gonzalez and Sweeny, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Dorothy Cropper, J.), rendered December 3, 2002, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts) and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to three concurrent terms of 5 to 10 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490 [1987]). Issues of credibility and identification were properly considered by the jury and there is no basis for disturbing its determinations. The officers had a sufficient opportunity to observe the transaction, and their account of the incident was plausible. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Marlow, Gonzalez and Sweeny, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 A.D.3d 123, 791 N.Y.S.2d 821, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3460, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mcfadden-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack