Opinion
October 5, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Charles J. Tejada, J.).
Defendant's contention that the trial court erred in admitting testimony that he possessed $88 at the time of his arrest has not been preserved as a matter of law and we decline to consider it in the interest of justice. (CPL 470.05.) Were we to reach this contention we would find it without merit. Where a defendant is charged with the sale of drugs, in addition to possession of other drugs with intent to sell, money recovered from the defendant is admissible "as relevant to establish intent" (People v. Haynes, 172 A.D.2d 242, lv denied 78 N.Y.2d 967). Accordingly, the money was properly admitted into evidence and it was permissible for the prosecutor to make comment.
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Ellerin, Wallach, Kassal and Nardelli, JJ.