Opinion
February 21, 1991
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Gerald Sheindlin, J.).
Defendant's request for an agency charge was properly denied. Defendant urges that he never exhibited any independent desire to promote the transaction or behaved like a salesman, but the evidence does not permit the inference that he acted as the undercover officers' agent. The evidence does not suggest that defendant was a mere extension of the officers. (People v Argibay, 45 N.Y.2d 45; People v Ramirez, 159 A.D.2d 375.) Defendant had no prior contact with the officers, nor were his actions indicative of the fact that he acted only on their behalf. (People v Thompson, 167 A.D.2d 161.)
We find no merit to defendant's claim that the trial court abused its discretion in sentencing defendant.
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Milonas, Ross, Asch and Kassal, JJ.