Opinion
May 12, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Nicholas Figueroa, J.).
Since the People were required to prove that defendant possessed heroin with the specific intent to sell it, the $2060 cash recovered from him upon his arrest was properly admitted in evidence (People v. Milom, 75 A.D.2d 68, 71-72). The issue of whether defendant was deprived of a fair trial by the absence of a circumstantial evidence charge is unpreserved since defendant did not specifically request it at trial (CPL 470.05). In any event, were we to reach the issue in the interest of justice, we would find that the evidence presented was both direct and circumstantial, and that the charge therefore was not warranted (People v. Devonish, 159 A.D.2d 320, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 733).
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Ross, Smith and Rubin, JJ.