Opinion
June 3, 1999.
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Arlene Silverman, J.).
The verdict was supported by legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. The totality of the evidence permitted a reasonable conclusion that defendant's careful questioning of the undercover officer was part of the drug selling operation and that defendant was not merely assisting a stranger in locating a supplier of drugs, but could have been a screener or steerer. Also, the jury was free to reject defendant's agency defense which was properly charged without objection by defendant ( see, People v. Lam Lek Chong, 45 N.Y.2d 64, 73-76).
We have considered and rejected defendant's remaining claims, including those contained in his pro se supplemental brief.
Concur — Ellerin, P. J., Tom, Wallach and Friedman, JJ.