Opinion
September 1, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Jay Gold, J.).
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People and giving them the benefit of every reasonable inference (People v. Malizia, 62 N.Y.2d 755, cert denied 469 U.S. 932), defendant's guilt was proven beyond a reason doubt (People v Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490). Contrary to defendant's argument, a factual finding that the drugs in question were purchased from an unknown individual or individuals during the short period of time that the buyers were obscured from the view of the observing officer would involve improper conjecture (see, People v. Castillo, 47 N.Y.2d 270, 277). The trial court's findings of fact and credibility are supported by the record and will not be disturbed by this Court (People v. Fonte, 159 A.D.2d 346, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 734).
Defendant's current claims that police testimony regarding general street narcotics operations was improperly admitted as prejudicially linking defendant with drug dealers in general, and without appropriate expert qualification, are unpreserved by objection (CPL 470.05). In any event, the testimony in question was offered by an officer with sufficient experience to be qualified as an expert, was limited, and was directed toward explaining the circumstances surrounding defendant's arrest, including the failure of the police to recover drugs from defendant (see, People v. Gonzalez, 180 A.D.2d 553, 554, lv denied 79 N.Y.2d 1001).
Likewise unpreserved are defendant's current claims of prosecutorial misconduct in summation (CPL 470.05; People v Iannelli, 69 N.Y.2d 684, cert denied 482 U.S. 914). Were we to review in the interest of justice, we would find no basis for modification of the judgment.
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Carro, Wallach, Williams and Tom, JJ.