People v. Pilgrim

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Pilgrim

417 N.E.2d 559, 52 N.Y.2d 730, 436 N.Y.S.2d 265, 1980 N.Y. LEXIS 2841

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedDecember 16, 1980

StatusPublished

Cited by10 cases

This text of 417 N.E.2d 559 (People v. Pilgrim) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Pilgrim, 417 N.E.2d 559, 52 N.Y.2d 730, 436 N.Y.S.2d 265, 1980 N.Y. LEXIS 2841 (N.Y. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Counts 1 and 4 of the indictment (criminal sale of a controlled substance in the first and second degrees, respectively) , on which defendant was convicted and that are the subject of this appeal, were submitted to the jury on theories both of completed sale and of agreements to sell *732 (Penal Law, §220.00, subd 1). While no particular instructions were included as to the elements of the transaction required to be proved to establish an agreement to sell, no protest to their omission from the court’s charge was registered by defendant.

The record contains sufficient evidence of transactions in Nassau County to support convictions on the basis of agreements to sell made in that county. The trial court made no error, therefore, when it denied defendant’s application to dismiss the counts on the ground that venue was improperly laid in Nassau County.

Nor may defendant now be heard to complain that the trial court erred in failing to submit the venue issue to the jury for its resolution. In view of the fact, as defendant candidly concedes, that he neither requested such submission nor took exception to the court’s failure to submit the issue to the jury, his claim of error, if any, has not been preserved for our review.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

Counts 1 and 4 of the indictment (criminal sale of a controlled substance in the first and second degrees, respectively) , on which defendant was convicted and that are the subject of this appeal, were submitted to the jury on theories both of completed sale and of agreements to sell *732 (Penal Law, §220.00, subd 1). While no particular instructions were included as to the elements of the transaction required to be proved to establish an agreement to sell, no protest to their omission from the court’s charge was registered by defendant.

The record contains sufficient evidence of transactions in Nassau County to support convictions on the basis of agreements to sell made in that county. The trial court made no error, therefore, when it denied defendant’s application to dismiss the counts on the ground that venue was improperly laid in Nassau County.

Nor may defendant now be heard to complain that the trial court erred in failing to submit the venue issue to the jury for its resolution. In view of the fact, as defendant candidly concedes, that he neither requested such submission nor took exception to the court’s failure to submit the issue to the jury, his claim of error, if any, has not been preserved for our review.

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur.

Order affirmed in a memorandum.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

417 N.E.2d 559, 52 N.Y.2d 730, 436 N.Y.S.2d 265, 1980 N.Y. LEXIS 2841, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-pilgrim-ny-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack