Opinion
March 13, 1992
Appeal from the Monroe County Court, Maloy, J.
Present — Callahan, J.P., Boomer, Balio, Davis and Doerr, JJ.
Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Following a nonjury trial, defendant was found guilty of criminal sale and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the first degree arising out of her participation in the sale of cocaine to an undercover officer. Viewing the evidence, as we must, in a manner most favorable to the People (see, People v Thompson, 72 N.Y.2d 410, 413, rearg denied 73 N.Y.2d 870; People v Ford, 66 N.Y.2d 428, 437), we conclude that the verdict was supported by legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495). The record belies defendant's contention that she was merely present at her boyfriend's home, and did not actively participate, when codefendants Ruiz and Colon sold drugs to the undercover officer.
County Court did not err in denying defendant's motion to sever. An application for severance is addressed to the discretion of the trial court (People v Cardwell, 78 N.Y.2d 996, 997; People v Cruz, 66 N.Y.2d 61, 69, revd on other grounds and remanded 481 U.S. 186, on remand 70 N.Y.2d 733). Where proof against the defendants is supplied by the same evidence, only the most cogent reasons warrant a severance (People v Bornholdt, 33 N.Y.2d 75, 87, cert denied sub nom. Victory v New York, 416 U.S. 905; People v Sanders, 162 A.D.2d 327, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 944). In the instant case the defenses of defendant and codefendant were not in irreconcilable conflict (see, People v Mahboubian, 74 N.Y.2d 174). Furthermore, because this was a bench trial, there was no danger of significant prejudice to defendant.
We have reviewed the other issues raised on appeal and we find that they are without merit. The trial court properly concluded that its Sandoval ruling (see, People v Sandoval, 34 N.Y.2d 371) did not limit the scope of cross-examination of that defendant by the other (People v McGee, 68 N.Y.2d 328, 333; People v Sanders, supra).