Opinion
December 22, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Felice Shea, J.).
Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the People (People v Malizia, 62 N.Y.2d 755, 757, cert denied 469 U.S. 932), there was sufficient evidence to rebut the defense that defendant was merely an agent of the undercover officer. After the officer asked defendant for "caps", defendant replied affirmatively and told the officer to follow him, indicating that "his man" had "nickels". Defendant escorted the officer to his cohort, directing him to "take care" of the officer. Defendant's cohort gave the officer the vials and the officer handed defendant's companion money in exchange. Under these circumstances, "defendant's conduct demonstrated an interest in promoting the transaction and that his involvement went `beyond being a mere extension of the buyer'" (People v McDermott, 192 A.D.2d 415, 416, lv denied 81 N.Y.2d 1076). That defendant did not handle the drugs or the purchase money does not negate his accessorial liability (supra).
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Wallach, Kupferman, Asch and Tom, JJ.