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. Raymond JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Rothwax, J.), rendered May 17, 1995, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 7 to 14 years, unanimously affirmed.
The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. We see no reason to disturb the jury's determinations concerning credibility and reliability of identification testimony.
The People elicited a sufficient basis, including the undercover officers' continued operations in the limited geographical area of defendant's arrest, to warrant closure of the courtroom during the testimony of the undercover officers (People v. Ayala, 90 N.Y.2d 490, 498, 662 N.Y.S.2d 739, 685 N.E.2d 492, cert. denied 522 U.S. 1002, 118 S.Ct. 574, 139 L.Ed.2d 413). The court was under no obligation to consider, sua sponte, alternatives to closure not suggested by the parties (People v. Ayala, supra, at 505, 662 N.Y.S.2d 739, 685 N.E.2d 492).
Defendant's ineffective assistance claim would require a CPL 440.10 motion to develop the record (People v. Love, 57 N.Y.2d 998, 457 N.Y.S.2d 238, 443 N.E.2d 486). On the existing record, we find that defendant received meaningful representation (People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 444 N.Y.S.2d 893, 429 N.E.2d 400).
We have considered and rejected defendant's remaining contentions, including those raised in his pro se supplemental brief.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
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: October 13, 1998
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)