Opinion
January 15, 1991
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Joseph Mazur, J.).
In this "buy-and-bust" operation the prosecution proved beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant was not acting merely as an agent of the buyer. The evidence showed that the undercover officer approached a group of people in front of a bodega, and asked if anyone had crack. Defendant responded that he did. Defendant and the undercover were not acquainted with each other prior to this time. By asking how much the undercover officer wanted, and then gesturing for payment, the defendant acted as a salesman and not as the undercover officer's agent. (See, People v Vargas, 135 A.D.2d 853, 854.)
Testimony concerning the "pre-buy meeting" was properly allowed as limited background material.
We have reviewed defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Milonas, Rosenberger, Wallach and Smith, JJ.