From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Sanders

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 16, 1999
266 A.D.2d 50 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

November 16, 1999

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Jay Gold, J.), rendered April 17, 1997, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 4 1/2 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

Theresa A. Foudy for Respondent.

Cynthia Feathers for Defendant-Appellant.

ELLERIN, P.J., ROSENBERGER, NARDELLI, LERNER, ANDRIAS, JJ.


The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence. We see no reason to disturb the jury's determinations concerning credibility. There was ample evidence from which the jury could reasonably infer that the glassine envelope of heroin recovered from the apprehended buyer's hand was the same object that he had just obtained from defendant.

Although "the preferred phrasing to convey the concept and degree of reasonable doubt is found in the Pattern Criminal Jury Instructions," (People v. Cubino, 88 N.Y.2d 998, 1000), the court's charge on reasonable doubt, viewed in totality, conveyed the appropriate legal principles and does not warrant reversal (see,People v. Fonseca, 262 A.D.2d 239, 690 N.Y.S.2d 456).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

People v. Sanders

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 16, 1999
266 A.D.2d 50 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

People v. Sanders

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. KENNITH SANDERS, etc.…

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

Date published: Nov 16, 1999

Citations

266 A.D.2d 50 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
698 N.Y.S.2d 459

Citing Cases

People v. Michael

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There…