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. William H. COLES, Defendant-Appellant.
Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (Penal Law § 220.16[1] ) and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree (§ 220.06[5] ). County Court properly allowed the People to present evidence of uncharged drug transactions to establish that defendant possessed the crack cocaine seized from his pocket with the intent to sell it (see People v. Maddox, 272 A.D.2d 884, 884-885, 708 N.Y.S.2d 769, lv. denied 95 N.Y.2d 867, 715 N.Y.S.2d 222, 738 N.E.2d 370). The court also properly allowed a police sergeant to testify as an expert that the quantity and packaging of the drugs seized from defendant were consistent with the sale of drugs (see People v. Hicks, 2 N.Y.3d 750, 751, 778 N.Y.S.2d 745, 811 N.E.2d 7), and that the amount of cash recovered from defendant was inconsistent with the amount of cash recovered from persons arrested by the sergeant for the possession of crack cocaine for their personal use (see generally id.). We reject the contention of defendant that he was denied effective assistance of counsel based on defense counsel's failure to move for a trial order of dismissal (see People v. Acevedo, 44 A.D.3d 168, 841 N.Y.S.2d 55). Finally, the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see generally People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672), and the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.
MEMORANDUM:
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: September 28, 2007
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth 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)