People v. Rosello

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Rosello

298 A.D.2d 212, 748 N.Y.S.2d 248, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9640

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

DecidedOctober 15, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 298 A.D.2d 212 (People v. Rosello) 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. Rosello, 298 A.D.2d 212, 748 N.Y.S.2d 248, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9640 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (William Leibovitz, J.), rendered November 18, 1997, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 6 to 12 years, unanimously affirmed.

Notice pursuant to CPL 710.30 (1) (b) was not required for the confirmatory identification made by the “ghost” undercover officer in this buy-and-bust operation. There is no basis upon which to distinguish a confirmatory identification made by a “ghost” from one made by a purchasing undercover officer (People v Cordero, 227 AD2d 290, lv denied 88 NY2d 1020; see also People v Roberts, 79 NY2d 964).

A contemporaneous uncharged drug sale was properly admitted to prove that defendant acted in concert in the charged sale and possessed drugs with intent to sell (see People v Garcia, 276 AD2d 270, lv denied 95 NY2d 963).

The challenged portions of the People’s summation were fair [213]*213comment on the evidence and the reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom, in proper response to the defense summation, and any prejudice was prevented by the court’s curative actions (see People v Overlee, 236 AD2d 133, lv denied 91 NY2d 976; People v D’Alessandro, 184 AD2d 114, 118-119, lv denied 81 NY2d 884). Concur — Nardelli, J.P., Mazzarelli, Sullivan, Ellerin 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 (William Leibovitz, J.), rendered November 18, 1997, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 6 to 12 years, unanimously affirmed.

Notice pursuant to CPL 710.30 (1) (b) was not required for the confirmatory identification made by the “ghost” undercover officer in this buy-and-bust operation. There is no basis upon which to distinguish a confirmatory identification made by a “ghost” from one made by a purchasing undercover officer (People v Cordero, 227 AD2d 290, lv denied 88 NY2d 1020; see also People v Roberts, 79 NY2d 964).

A contemporaneous uncharged drug sale was properly admitted to prove that defendant acted in concert in the charged sale and possessed drugs with intent to sell (see People v Garcia, 276 AD2d 270, lv denied 95 NY2d 963).

The challenged portions of the People’s summation were fair [213]*213comment on the evidence and the reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom, in proper response to the defense summation, and any prejudice was prevented by the court’s curative actions (see People v Overlee, 236 AD2d 133, lv denied 91 NY2d 976; People v D’Alessandro, 184 AD2d 114, 118-119, lv denied 81 NY2d 884). Concur — Nardelli, J.P., Mazzarelli, Sullivan, Ellerin and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

298 A.D.2d 212, 748 N.Y.S.2d 248, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9640, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-rosello-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack