Opinion
March 2, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Brill, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
On August 22, 1988, an undercover officer went into a building located at 2835 West 20th Street in Brooklyn, purchased four vials of cocaine from the defendant, and left. Within minutes after the sale, members of the backup team burst into the building. The defendant attempted to flee up the hallway staircase but was apprehended by one of the backup officers. At the defendant's feet were ten vials, nine of which proved to contain cocaine. After the defendant was arrested, the undercover officer made a confirmatory identification at the police precinct.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to support the defendant's conviction of the sale of cocaine to the undercover officer and his having possessed, with the intent to sell, the nine vials of cocaine found at his feet (see, People v Hansen, 158 A.D.2d 542; People v Gonzalez, 133 A.D.2d 123). Contrary to the defendant's assertion on appeal, we do not find any inconsistencies between the testimony of the undercover officer and the testimony of the members of the backup team which render the undercover officer's account incredible as a matter of law (see, e.g., People v Austin, 168 A.D.2d 502). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15).
The defendant's remaining contentions regarding improprieties in the trial court's charge are either unpreserved for appellate review (CPL 470.05), or without merit. Rosenblatt, J.P., O'Brien, Ritter and Copertino, JJ., concur.