From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Smith

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 11, 1992
184 A.D.2d 310 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

June 11, 1992

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (John A.K. Bradley, J.).


The trial evidence was sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant participated in the sale of heroin, as testified to by the undercover officer, and that he was not present merely to purchase drugs. In particular, defendant's pointed questioning of the undercover officer sufficiently demonstrated that defendant's approval was necessary to consummate the sale.

There is no reason to doubt the police officers' testimony that the information they recorded in their daily report on the day of defendant's arrest was the equivalent of that contained in their discarded scrap notes (see, People v. Serrando, 184 A.D.2d 1094). The trial court's decision to sanction the People by delivering an adverse inference charge was, in the circumstances, appropriate (see, People v. Martinez, 71 N.Y.2d 937).

In light of the fact that this offense constitutes defendant's third conviction for felony drug sales, we do not find the sentence imposed to have been excessive.

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Milonas, Ross, Asch and Kassal, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Smith

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jun 11, 1992
184 A.D.2d 310 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

People v. Smith

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. KEVIN SMITH, Appellant

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

Date published: Jun 11, 1992

Citations

184 A.D.2d 310 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
584 N.Y.S.2d 567

Citing Cases

People v. Custodro

Mere presence, even with awareness of the crime occurring, is insufficient to establish accomplice liability…