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

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

DecidedSeptember 25, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 275 A.D.2d 801 (People v. Negron) 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. 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

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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

275 A.D.2d 801, 714 N.Y.S.2d 228, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9405, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-negron-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack