Opinion
May 10, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Joseph A. Cerbone, J.).
There is no merit to defendant's contention that the People failed to disprove that he acted as an agent of the undercover officer in this buy and bust transaction. Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the People and giving them the benefit of every reasonable inference (People v. Malizia, 62 N.Y.2d 755, 757, cert denied 469 U.S. 932), a rational jury could have found that defendant was a seller and not "merely a purchaser doing a favor for a friend" (People v. Lam Lek Chong, 45 N.Y.2d 64, 74, cert denied 439 U.S. 935; see, People v. Simpson, 85 A.D.2d 306, 310, citing People v. Gonzales, 66 A.D.2d 828).
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Carro, Asch, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.