People v. Recupeio

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Recupeio

251 A.D.2d 255, 675 N.Y.S.2d 526, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7813

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

DecidedJune 30, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 251 A.D.2d 255 (People v. Recupeio) 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. Recupeio, 251 A.D.2d 255, 675 N.Y.S.2d 526, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7813 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Alvin Schlesinger, J.), rendered August 13, 1996, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4V2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490). Credibility issues were properly placed before the jury and we find no reason to disturb its findings. There was ample evidence from which the jury could infer that defendant sold an object to the buyer in this observation sale and that the object was the glassine envelope of heroin recovered from the buyer. Concur — Milonas, J. P., Rosenberger, Nardelli, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.

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

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Alvin Schlesinger, J.), rendered August 13, 1996, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4V2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490). Credibility issues were properly placed before the jury and we find no reason to disturb its findings. There was ample evidence from which the jury could infer that defendant sold an object to the buyer in this observation sale and that the object was the glassine envelope of heroin recovered from the buyer. Concur — Milonas, J. P., Rosenberger, Nardelli, Wallach and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

251 A.D.2d 255, 675 N.Y.S.2d 526, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7813, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-recupeio-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack