Opinion
November 13, 1990
Appeal from the County Court, Westchester County (Colabella, J.).
Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the expert testimony at trial was not based entirely on comparative tests using "known" but uncertified standards, but on a series of different tests, using other scientific means. Thus, the court properly allowed the expert to express her opinion that the substance sold by the defendant was cocaine and it was for the trier of fact to determine what weight to give her opinion (see, People v. Hushie, 145 A.D.2d 506; People v. Flores, 138 A.D.2d 512; People v. Wicks, 122 A.D.2d 239).
The People clearly established a prima facie case against the defendant on each of the crimes charged under indictment No. 87-00813. Thus, the trial court's denial of defendant's motion for a trial order of dismissal was proper (see, People v. Levine, 106 A.D.2d 471; CPL 290.10).
We have reviewed the defendant's remaining contention and find it to be without merit. Sullivan, J.P., Rosenblatt, Miller and Ritter, JJ., concur.