People v. Padilla

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Padilla

251 A.D.2d 171, 673 N.Y.S.2d 909, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7293

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

DecidedJune 18, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 251 A.D.2d 171 (People v. Padilla) 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. Padilla, 251 A.D.2d 171, 673 N.Y.S.2d 909, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7293 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Bernard Fried, J.), rendered April 11, 1996, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and resisting arrest, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4V2 to 9 years and a conditional discharge, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based upon legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490). There was ample evidence that defendant possessed the drugs that were recovered from his person and from his radio with the intent to sell them. We see no reason to disturb the jury’s credibility determinations.

The defendant waived his right to an adjournment prior to being arraigned as a second felony offender, and, in any event, since he did not challenge his prior conviction, no hearing was necessary (see, CPL 400.21 [5]).

The court properly declined to deliver the “two-inference” instruction requested by defendant (see, People v Perry, 223 AD2d 479). Concur — Milonas, J. P., Nardelli, Wallach and Saxe, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Bernard Fried, J.), rendered April 11, 1996, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and resisting arrest, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4V2 to 9 years and a conditional discharge, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based upon legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490). There was ample evidence that defendant possessed the drugs that were recovered from his person and from his radio with the intent to sell them. We see no reason to disturb the jury’s credibility determinations.

The defendant waived his right to an adjournment prior to being arraigned as a second felony offender, and, in any event, since he did not challenge his prior conviction, no hearing was necessary (see, CPL 400.21 [5]).

The court properly declined to deliver the “two-inference” instruction requested by defendant (see, People v Perry, 223 AD2d 479). Concur — Milonas, J. P., Nardelli, Wallach and Saxe, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

251 A.D.2d 171, 673 N.Y.S.2d 909, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7293, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-padilla-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack