Opinion
November 10, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Dominic Massaro, J.).
The conviction on appeal arises from an alleged $20 street sale of cocaine and defendant's possession of additional contraband following her arrest. The People properly concede that there must be a new trial on the sale count of the indictment because the original arrest notes of both the undercover and the backup officers were destroyed prior to trial, and because the trial court's error in rejecting the imposition of any Rosario sanction, despite defendant's request for an adverse inference charge, was fully preserved (People v Wallace, 76 N.Y.2d 953; People v Geathers, 172 A.D.2d 134, lv denied 79 N.Y.2d 1049).
Although the People urge that only defendant's identification was at issue, and that the conviction upon the possession counts should therefore be affirmed, we note that defendant's proofs presented the claim that her arrest was a police blunder, compounded when they planted cocaine in her bag to fabricate a case. Thus, the defense to each of the charges is inextricably intertwined, and there must be a new trial on the entire indictment (cf., People v [Stanley] Davis, 173 A.D.2d 634, lv denied 78 N.Y.2d 964).
Defendant has failed to present an adequate record for us to review her contention that she was denied a speedy trial under CPL 30.30 (People v Olivo, 52 N.Y.2d 309, 320; People v Bagarozy, 182 A.D.2d 565, lv denied 80 N.Y.2d 901; People v Clendinen, 173 A.D.2d 366, lv denied 80 N.Y.2d 895). Upon review of the record before us, we find the claim to have been unpreserved, and abandoned when defendant proceeded to trial (People v Rodriguez, 50 N.Y.2d 553).
Concur — Ellerin, J.P., Wallach, Ross and Kassal, JJ.