Opinion
December 23, 1994
Appeal from the Onondaga County Court, Mulroy, J.
Present — Green, J.P., Balio, Wesley, Callahan and Doerr, JJ.
Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We reject the contention that defendant's conviction of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree is not supported by legally sufficient evidence. Defendant was convicted under an aggregate weight statute (see, Penal Law § 220.09), and his knowledge of the weight of the controlled substance may be inferred from his handling of the material (see, People v McQueen, 209 A.D.2d 995; People v Porter, 207 A.D.2d 993; People v Goss, 204 A.D.2d 984). Further, the evidence is sufficient to establish that defendant, rather than the other occupant of the bedroom, possessed the cocaine, and the verdict is not contrary to the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495). The trial court properly declined defendant's request for an accomplice charge (see, CPL 60.22; People v White, 26 N.Y.2d 276). We further conclude that "the evidence, the law and the circumstances of [the] case, viewed together and as of the time of representation, reveal that meaningful representation was provided" (People v Satterfield, 66 N.Y.2d 796, 798-799).