People v. Vincente

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Vincente

294 A.D.2d 105, 740 N.Y.S.2d 867, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4352

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

DecidedMay 2, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 294 A.D.2d 105 (People v. Vincente) 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. Vincente, 294 A.D.2d 105, 740 N.Y.S.2d 867, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4352 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Rena Uviller, J.), rendered February 23, 2000, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds, and sentencing him to an aggregate term of 2 to 6 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Questions of credibility and identification were properly presented to the jury, and there is no basis upon which to disturb its findings (People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94). The undercover officer had an adequate opportunity to observe defendant and provided a detailed description. Concur—Saxe, J.P., Buckley, Rosenberger, Friedman 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 February 23, 2000, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds, and sentencing him to an aggregate term of 2 to 6 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Questions of credibility and identification were properly presented to the jury, and there is no basis upon which to disturb its findings (People v Gaimari, 176 NY 84, 94). The undercover officer had an adequate opportunity to observe defendant and provided a detailed description. Concur—Saxe, J.P., Buckley, Rosenberger, Friedman and Marlow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

294 A.D.2d 105, 740 N.Y.S.2d 867, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4352, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-vincente-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack