People v. Negron

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Negron

275 A.D.2d 801, 714 N.Y.S.2d 228, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9405

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Negron. Read the opinion of the Court — 280 A.D.2d 780 →

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided September 25, 2000·Published

Opinion

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Reichbach, J.), rendered February 2, 1999, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Justice Florio has been substituted for former Justice Joy (see, 22 NYCRR 670.1 [c]).

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his argument that the evidence was legally insufficient (see, People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that the evidence was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, on the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]; People v Gamble, 173 AD2d 555).

[802]*802The sentence imposed is not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). Bracken, J. P., Friedmann, Florio and Schmidt, 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, Kings County (Reichbach, J.), rendered February 2, 1999, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence. Justice Florio has been substituted for former Justice Joy (see, 22 NYCRR 670.1 [c]).

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his argument that the evidence was legally insufficient (see, People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that the evidence was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, on the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]; People v Gamble, 173 AD2d 555).

[802]*802The sentence imposed is not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80). Bracken, J. P., Friedmann, Florio and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

People v. Negron, 275 A.D.2d 801, 714 N.Y.S.2d 228, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9405 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

275 A.D.2d 801 (People v. Negron) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related