People v. Santiago

273 A.D.2d 62, 709 N.Y.S.2d 534, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6329
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Santiago. Read the opinion of the Court — 244 A.D.2d 263

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (John Moore, J.), rendered October 2, 1998, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 7 to 14 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. We see no reason to disturb the jury’s determinations concerning credibility. Defendant’s accessorial liability was clearly established by evidence that shortly after the undercover officer addressed a request for drugs to defendant and his codefendant, defendant told the officer to wait, left with the codefendant, returned, and transferred a flashlight to the codefendant, from which the co-defendant removed drugs subsequently sold to the officer. Defendant’s knowledge that the flashlight contained drugs could be readily inferred, and provides the only logical explanation for his conduct (see, People v Reisman, 29 NY2d 278, 285-287, cert denied 405 US 1041).

We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion or other basis for a sentence reduction. Concur — Williams, J. P., Mazzarelli, Lerner, Andrias and Friedman, JJ.

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

People v. Santiago, 273 A.D.2d 62, 709 N.Y.S.2d 534, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6329 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

273 A.D.2d 62 (People v. Santiago) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Reisman
277 N.E.2d 396 (New York Court of Appeals, 1971)