Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Michael WILSON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Bonnie G. Wittner, J.), rendered January 16, 2007, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of conspiracy in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of 7 to 21 years, unanimously affirmed.
The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v. Danielson, 9 N.Y.3d 342, 348-349, 849 N.Y.S.2d 480, 880 N.E.2d 1 [2007] ). The evidence established that defendant was part of the charged conspiracy, and that he was not merely an independent dealer who happened to obtain his supply of drugs from the conspirators. There was specific evidence that defendant was personally involved in preparing drugs for sale and providing them to street-level dealers. Defendant's arguments on this issue are similar to arguments this Court rejected on a codefendant's appeal (see People v. Council, 52 A.D.3d 222, 859 N.Y.S.2d 152 [2008], lv. denied 11 N.Y.3d 735, 864 N.Y.S.2d 394, 894 N.E.2d 658 [2008] ).
Defendant's statutory double jeopardy claim is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we find it without merit (see Matter of Robinson v. Snyder, 259 A.D.2d 280, 686 N.Y.S.2d 392 [1999], lv. denied 93 N.Y.2d 810, 694 N.Y.S.2d 632, 716 N.E.2d 697 [1999] ). To the extent that defendant is raising an ineffective assistance of counsel claim regarding this issue, that claim is also without merit.
We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.
Thank you for your feedback!
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.
Decided: December 02, 2008
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)