People v. Sosa

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Sosa

292 A.D.2d 225, 738 N.Y.S.2d 569, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2418

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

DecidedMarch 12, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 292 A.D.2d 225 (People v. Sosa) 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. Sosa, 292 A.D.2d 225, 738 N.Y.S.2d 569, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2418 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Rena Uviller, J.), rendered May 13, 1999, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of IV2 to 4V2 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Issues of credibility and identification were properly considered by the jury and there is no basis upon which to disturb its determinations. There was ample evidence of defendant’s guilt, including the recovery of prerecorded buy money from defendant’s pocket. Concur — Saxe, J.P., Rosenberger, Ellerin, Wallach and Marlow, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Rena Uviller, J.), rendered May 13, 1999, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of IV2 to 4V2 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Issues of credibility and identification were properly considered by the jury and there is no basis upon which to disturb its determinations. There was ample evidence of defendant’s guilt, including the recovery of prerecorded buy money from defendant’s pocket. Concur — Saxe, J.P., Rosenberger, Ellerin, Wallach and Marlow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

292 A.D.2d 225, 738 N.Y.S.2d 569, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2418, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-sosa-nyappdiv-2002.