From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Lilly

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Sep 30, 1999
264 A.D.2d 684 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

September 30, 1999

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Nicholas Figueroa, J.), rendered May 6, 1998, 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, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 5 1/2 to 11 years, unanimously affirmed.

Brian O'Donoghue for Respondent.

Howard S. Jaffe for Defendant-Appellant.

ELLERIN, P.J., ROSENBERGER, NARDELLI, MAZZARELLI, ANDRIAS, JJ.


The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. We find no basis in the record to disturb the jury's determinations concerning credibility of witnesses.

The trial court properly admitted evidence of the uncharged sale that occurred minutes after the charged sale, since it was relevant to the charge of possession with intent to sell as well as being relevant to identity and other issues with respect to the sale charge (see, People v. Pressley, 216 A.D.2d 202, lv denied 86 N.Y.2d 800). Since defendant never requested a limiting instruction concerning such evidence, his claim is unpreserved for appellate review and we decline to review it in the interest of justice.

The court's instruction to the jury to avoid engaging in conjecture or speculation concerning the possible use of recording equipment does not warrant reversal when read as a whole, since the court simultaneously charged the jury concerning the effect of lack of evidence, and since the instruction did not eliminate from the jury's consideration an essential element of defendant's defense (see, People v. Marchese, 224 A.D.2d 341, lv denied 88 N.Y.2d 989).

Defendant's claim of a Rosario violation is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find nothing in the record suggesting that the People failed to produce the requested materials.

We have considered and rejected defendant's remaining claims.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

People v. Lilly

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Sep 30, 1999
264 A.D.2d 684 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

People v. Lilly

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. MICHAEL LILLY, etc.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Sep 30, 1999

Citations

264 A.D.2d 684 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
696 N.Y.S.2d 423

Citing Cases

People v. Smith

The instruction that there was no "formal" agreement was literally true but misleading, because it failed to…

People v. Luciano

Defendant's challenge for cause to a prospective juror was properly denied since the juror, an FBI agent who…