People v. Paulino

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Paulino

48 A.D.3d 250, 849 N.Y.S.2d 778

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

DecidedFebruary 7, 2008

StatusPublished

This text of 48 A.D.3d 250 (People v. Paulino) 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. Paulino, 48 A.D.3d 250, 849 N.Y.S.2d 778 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment Supreme Court, New York County (Bonnie G. Wittner, J.), rendered July 22, 2005, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 4V2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s determinations concerning credibility (see People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). The police found defendant in possession of prerecorded buy money, and there was a satisfactory explanation for their inability to recover additional drugs. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Friedman, Catterson and Acosta, JJ.

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

Judgment Supreme Court, New York County (Bonnie G. Wittner, J.), rendered July 22, 2005, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 4V2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s determinations concerning credibility (see People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). The police found defendant in possession of prerecorded buy money, and there was a satisfactory explanation for their inability to recover additional drugs. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Friedman, Catterson and Acosta, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

48 A.D.3d 250, 849 N.Y.S.2d 778, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-paulino-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack