People v. Soto

34 A.D.3d 340, 824 N.Y.S.2d 286
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in People v. Soto. Read the opinion of the Court — 8 A.D.3d 683

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward J. McLaughlin, J.), rendered March 5, 2004, 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 her to concurrent terms of 1 to 3 years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Defendant’s arguments are substantially similar to arguments that this Court rejected on a codefendant’s appeal (People v DeJesus, 30 AD3d 1132 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 811 [2006]). There is no basis for [341]*341disturbing the jury’s determinations concerning credibility. The evidence supported the conclusion that defendant was a participant in the sale and a joint possessor of the drugs (see People v Bello, 92 NY2d 523 [1998]; see also People v Bundy, 90 NY2d 918, 920 [1997]). In particular, there was evidence supporting the inference that as the police approached the van from which drugs were being sold, defendant attempted to hide drugs in the crevice of a seat. We have considered and rejected defendant’s remaining arguments. Concur—Tom, J.P., Andrias, Saxe, Gonzalez and Sweeny, JJ.

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

People v. Soto, 34 A.D.3d 340, 824 N.Y.S.2d 286 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

34 A.D.3d 340 (People v. Soto) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Bello
705 N.E.2d 1209 (New York Court of Appeals, 1998)
People v. Bundy
686 N.E.2d 496 (New York Court of Appeals, 1997)
People v. DeJesus
30 A.D.3d 1132 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)