From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Rojas

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 3, 2006
25 A.D.3d 325 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)

Opinion

7456.

January 3, 2006.

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Peter J. Benitez, J.), rendered September 9, 2003, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 7 to 14 years, unanimously affirmed.

Office of the Appellate Defender, New York (Richard M. Greenberg of counsel) and Heller Ehrman LLP, New York (Gina M. Parlovecchio of counsel), for appellant.

Robert T. Johnson, District Attorney, Bronx (Dimitri Maisonet of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Saxe, J.P., Marlow, Williams, Catterson and Malone, JJ., concur.


The verdict rejecting defendant's agency defense was not against the weight of the evidence ( see People v. Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490). The evidence supported the conclusion that defendant did not act solely to accommodate the buyer ( see People v. Roche, 45 NY2d 78, 85, cert denied 439 US 958; People v. Lam Lek Chong, 45 NY2d 64, 74-75, cert denied 439 US 935).

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.

Defendant's remaining contentions are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would reject them.


Summaries of

People v. Rojas

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 3, 2006
25 A.D.3d 325 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
Case details for

People v. Rojas

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. DANIEL ROJAS, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Jan 3, 2006

Citations

25 A.D.3d 325 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 19
805 N.Y.S.2d 831

Citing Cases

People v. Foster

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant…