Summary
concluding that allegations of asking undercover buyer what he needed, telling him to wait near building where drugs were then sold, and bringing seller back to buyer, all while remaining nearby during sale, were "ampl[y]" indicative of shared intent to sell drugs
Summary of this case from Santiago v. United StatesOpinion
March 14, 2000
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Frederic Berman, J.), rendered October 15, 1997, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him to a term of 4 to 12 years, unanimously affirmed.
Christopher Sanders for respondent.
Terence J. Sweeny for Defendant-Appellant.
Nardelli, J.P., Mazzarelli, Lerner, Andrias, JJ.
The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There was ample evidence of accessorial liability (see, People v. Bello, 92 N.Y.2d 523). In inquiring of the undercover officer as to what he needed, telling him to wait near the building where the drugs were subsequently sold, leaving to bring the seller back to the officer, and remaining nearby during the sale, defendant was not merely acting as a source of general information where drugs could be purchased, but was clearly an intentional participant in the transaction.
We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.