PEOPLE v. MOSBY (1997)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.

PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Mark MOSBY, Appellant.

Decided: March 14, 1997

Before PINE, J.P., and LAWTON, DOERR, BALIO and BOEHM, JJ.

Edward J. Nowak by Stephen Bird, Rochester, for appellant. Howard R. Relin, Rochester, for respondent.

The argument of defendant that County Court erred in admitting evidence that he possessed $1,026 at the time of his arrest is not preserved for our review as a matter of law (see, CPL 470.05[2] ). Were we to review the argument, we would conclude that it is without merit. Because defendant was charged with possession of a controlled substance with intent to sell, evidence of money found on defendant's person at the time of arrest is probative of defendant's intent (see, People v. Strunkey, 221 A.D.2d 387, 633 N.Y.S.2d 353, lv denied 87 N.Y.2d 925, 641 N.Y.S.2d 607, 664 N.E.2d 518; People v. Sanchez, 197 A.D.2d 359, 360, 602 N.Y.S.2d 121, lv denied 82 N.Y.2d 902, 610 N.Y.S.2d 169, 632 N.E.2d 479; People v. Gadsden, 192 A.D.2d 1103, 597 N.Y.S.2d 256, lv denied 82 N.Y.2d 718, 602 N.Y.S.2d 815, 622 N.E.2d 316), and it was permissible for the prosecutor to comment upon the evidence on summation (see, People v. Sanchez, supra ).

Judgment unanimously affirmed.

MEMORANDUM:

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network