People v. Paturso

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Paturso

34 A.D.2d 832, 312 N.Y.S.2d 432, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4722

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

DecidedMay 25, 1970

StatusPublished

This text of 34 A.D.2d 832 (People v. Paturso) 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. Paturso, 34 A.D.2d 832, 312 N.Y.S.2d 432, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4722 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County, rendered May 15, 1969, convicting him of violating the Public Health Law with respect to narcotic drugs, upon a jury verdict, and sentencing him to an indeterminate prison term of from 7 to 10 years. Judgment affirmed. In our opinion, the proof presented an issue as to whether defendant was a seller of the heroin or merely the buyer’s accomplice or agent in purchasing this narcotic. We believe the jury was warranted in finding that the proof established beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant was one of the sellers and was beneficially interested in the proceeds of the sale (cf. People v. Wright, 20 A D 2d 652, affd. 15 N Y 2d 555; People v. Pulliam, 28 A D 2d 786). Christ, P. J., Latham, Kleinfeld, Brennan and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County, rendered May 15, 1969, convicting him of violating the Public Health Law with respect to narcotic drugs, upon a jury verdict, and sentencing him to an indeterminate prison term of from 7 to 10 years. Judgment affirmed. In our opinion, the proof presented an issue as to whether defendant was a seller of the heroin or merely the buyer’s accomplice or agent in purchasing this narcotic. We believe the jury was warranted in finding that the proof established beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant was one of the sellers and was beneficially interested in the proceeds of the sale (cf. People v. Wright, 20 A D 2d 652, affd. 15 N Y 2d 555; People v. Pulliam, 28 A D 2d 786). Christ, P. J., Latham, Kleinfeld, Brennan and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

34 A.D.2d 832, 312 N.Y.S.2d 432, 1970 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4722, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-paturso-nyappdiv-1970.