PEOPLE v. KINCHEN (2000)

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

PEOPLE of the State of New York, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. William KINCHEN, Defendant-Appellant.

Decided: December 27, 2000

PRESENT: PINE, J.P., WISNER, HURLBUTT and KEHOE, JJ.

Elizabeth C. Clarke, for defendant-appellant. Amy Molloy, for plaintiff-respondent.

Contrary to the contention of defendant, the verdict finding him guilty of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree (Penal Law § 220.18[1] ) is not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672). Defendant was seated in the front passenger seat of an automobile driven by codefendant, and a grocery bag containing 178 baggies of cocaine and a scale was lying at defendant's feet. The statutory presumption is applicable (see, Penal Law § 220.25[1] ), and testimony that a third person fled the automobile and left the drugs behind presented an issue of credibility for the jury to resolve. Upon weighing the relative probative force of the conflicting testimony, we conclude that the jury did not fail “to give the evidence the weight it should be accorded” (People v. Bleakley, supra, at 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672).

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Out of date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