From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Silvels

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 28, 1992
182 A.D.2d 576 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

April 28, 1992

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County, Richard Failla, J., Daniel P. FitzGerald, J.


We reject defendant's argument that the evidence that connected him with the vials of crack recovered from the floor near the feet of his co-defendant was legally insufficient. The credible testimony of the undercover officer adequately established that defendant was an active participant in the unconsummated drug transaction (People v Gordon, 76 N.Y.2d 595; see, People v Torres, 68 N.Y.2d 677). There is nothing in the record which demonstrates that the jury failed to give proper weight to the conflicting inferences that could be drawn from the evidence presented in respect to the identification of defendant by the undercover police officer (People v Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490).

We find no fault with the prosecutor's conduct in the proceedings, nor do we discern a deficiency in the court's charge or the representation afforded defendant by trial counsel.

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Carro, Kupferman, Kassal and Smith, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Silvels

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 28, 1992
182 A.D.2d 576 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

People v. Silvels

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. DARRYL SILVELS…

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

Date published: Apr 28, 1992

Citations

182 A.D.2d 576 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
582 N.Y.S.2d 434