People v. McIntyre

175 A.D.2d 637, 572 N.Y.S.2d 978, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10174
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJuly 12, 1991
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 175 A.D.2d 637 (People v. McIntyre) 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. McIntyre, 175 A.D.2d 637, 572 N.Y.S.2d 978, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10174 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Opinion

— Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: There is no merit to defendant’s argument that County Court erred in receiving into evidence a [638]*638package containing cocaine, which the proof demonstrated was sold by defendant to an undercover police officer. Although the police chemist acknowledged that the heat seal of the exhibit’s outer plastic bag was not fully intact before she actually tested the substance, she also asserted that the seal either partially "had not caught” or that the "seal came apart” as she was handling the bag and "looking for a place to cut into it”. In any event, the exhibit’s inner plastic bag containing the narcotics was knotted and sealed with tape bearing the date of the crime, the crime report number and the initials of the undercover police officer who seized the evidence. The testimony of the officer and the police chemist established that the inner plastic bag containing the cocaine had not been tampered with, and was the same bag that was purchased by the officer and tested by the chemist. The record thus contains reasonable assurances of the identity and unchanged condition of the packet sold by defendant (see, People v Green, 155 AD2d 880, lv denied 75 NY2d 813; People v Rice, 137 AD2d 845, lv denied 71 NY2d 1032). In the circumstances presented, we conclude that the testimony concerning the condition of the seal of the outer bag bears on the weight to be accorded the evidence rather than its admissibility (see, People v Connelly, 35 NY2d 171, 175).

We have reviewed the other issues raised by defendant and find them to be without merit. (Appeal from Judgment of Monroe County Court, Egan, J. — Criminal Sale Controlled Substance, 1st Degree.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Den-man, Green and Lowery, JJ.

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

Related

People v. Pearson
270 A.D.2d 290 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
People v. Waasdorp
237 A.D.2d 918 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
People v. Hemmings
191 A.D.2d 1020 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
People v. Moyer
186 A.D.2d 997 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
People v. Fenti
175 A.D.2d 598 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
175 A.D.2d 637, 572 N.Y.S.2d 978, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10174, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-mcintyre-nyappdiv-1991.