People v. McIntosh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. McIntosh

272 A.D.2d 628, 709 N.Y.S.2d 819, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5998

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

DecidedMay 30, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 272 A.D.2d 628 (People v. McIntosh) 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. McIntosh, 272 A.D.2d 628, 709 N.Y.S.2d 819, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5998 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Rooney, J.), rendered July 27, 1998, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant did not preserve for appellate review his contention that the People failed to prove his identity as the cocaine seller by legally sufficient evidence, as he did not raise that issue on his motion for a trial order of dismissal (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Wilkins, 260 AD2d 415; People v Gordon, 246 AD2d 555; People v White, 192 AD2d 736). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual [629]*629review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]). Ritter, J. P., Santucci, S. Miller and Goldstein, 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, Richmond County (Rooney, J.), rendered July 27, 1998, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant did not preserve for appellate review his contention that the People failed to prove his identity as the cocaine seller by legally sufficient evidence, as he did not raise that issue on his motion for a trial order of dismissal (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Wilkins, 260 AD2d 415; People v Gordon, 246 AD2d 555; People v White, 192 AD2d 736). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual [629]*629review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]). Ritter, J. P., Santucci, S. Miller and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

272 A.D.2d 628, 709 N.Y.S.2d 819, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5998, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mcintosh-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack