Opinion
February 28, 1991
Appeal from the County Court of Chemung County (Danaher, Jr., J.).
Given the testimony of the undercover officer and the informant, as well as the corroborating testimony from the backup surveillance investigators, we agree with County Court's conclusion that the People demonstrated that defendant was not acting as an agent (see, People v Williams, 132 A.D.2d 892). Therefore, defendant's contention that the court's decision was against the weight of the evidence is rejected (see, supra). Furthermore, we reject defendant's contention that the prison sentence of 6 to 12 years as a second felony offender was harsh and excessive. In view of his criminal record and the fact that the sentence was well within the statutory guidelines, we find no abuse of discretion in the sentence imposed by the court (see, People v Lipinski, 159 A.D.2d 860, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 860; People v Hoag, 94 A.D.2d 921).
Judgment affirmed. Mikoll, J.P., Yesawich, Jr., Levine, Mercure and Crew III, JJ., concur.