From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Cintron

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 3, 1996
232 A.D.2d 192 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

October 3, 1996.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Murray Mogel, J., at hearing; Richard Carruthers, J., at jury trial and sentence), rendered February 10, 1994, convicting defendant of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 4½ to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

Before: Rosenberger, Wallach, Kupferman and Tom, JJ.


Defendant's claim that it was insufficient for the arresting officer to testify, in conclusory fashion, that defendant met a radioed description, is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. "Were we to review it, we would find it to be without merit because the People did elicit the precise details of the radioed description itself ( see, People v Torres, 224 AD2d 251, lv denied 88 NY2d 886). Defendant's confrontation claim is also unpreserved ( People v George, 67 NY2d 817) and, in any event, without merit.


Summaries of

People v. Cintron

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 3, 1996
232 A.D.2d 192 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

People v. Cintron

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. ARNOLD CINTRON…

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

Date published: Oct 3, 1996

Citations

232 A.D.2d 192 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
647 N.Y.S.2d 942

Citing Cases

People v. Vinniane

The description transmitted from the officer observing the undercover decoy to the arresting officer was…

People v. Richardson

Defendant's claim that it was insufficient for the arresting officer to testify that defendant met the…