PEOPLE v. JAMISON (2004)

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Jeffrey M. Atlas, J.), rendered January 22, 2003, 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 4 1/212 to 9 years, unanimously affirmed.

 The court properly declined to instruct the jury on the agency defense, since there was no reasonable view of the evidence, viewed most favorably to defendant, to support that defense.   Another apparent participant in the drug operation “steered” the purchasing undercover officer to defendant, who then arranged the sale, walked the officer to a specific location, accepted his cash and returned with the drugs.   There was no evidence suggesting that defendant was doing a “favor” for the purchaser (see People v. Herring, 83 N.Y.2d 780, 610 N.Y.S.2d 949, 632 N.E.2d 1272;  People v. Lam Lek Chong, 45 N.Y.2d 64, 74-75, 407 N.Y.S.2d 674, 379 N.E.2d 200, cert. denied 439 U.S. 935, 99 S.Ct. 330, 58 L.Ed.2d 331;  People v. Vaughan, 300 A.D.2d 104, 750 N.Y.S.2d 846, lv. denied 99 N.Y.2d 633, 760 N.Y.S.2d 115, 790 N.E.2d 289).

 The court properly exercised its discretion in allowing a detective to testify as an expert to the roles typically played by various participants in a drug transaction.   This was specialized information not ordinarily within the knowledge of the average juror, and it was helpful to the jury in understanding how defendant and the other alleged participants in the transaction acted together (see People v. Smith, 2 N.Y.3d 8, 776 N.Y.S.2d 209, 808 N.E.2d 344;  People v. Brown, 97 N.Y.2d 500, 505-506, 743 N.Y.S.2d 374, 769 N.E.2d 1266;  People v. Lacey, 245 A.D.2d 145, 666 N.Y.S.2d 157, lv. denied 91 N.Y.2d 927, 670 N.Y.S.2d 409, 693 N.E.2d 756).   Furthermore, the expert testimony did not invade the province of the jury.