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, Ind. / Respondent, v. Dean Pacquette, Defendant–Appellant.
_
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (A. Kirke Bartley, Jr., J.), rendered June 11, 2008, as amended March 6, 2009, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him to a term of five years, unanimously affirmed.
The verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v. Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348–349 [2007] ). Moreover, the evidence was overwhelming. There is no basis for disturbing the jury's determinations concerning credibility and identification. Among other things, the evidence included the recovery of prerecorded buy money from defendant, notwithstanding defendant's implausible explanation for that fact.
The court properly determined that an identification made by an officer other than the purchasing undercover officer was confirmatory and thus did not require CPL 710.30(1)(b) notice (see People v. Wharton, 74 N.Y.2d 921 [1989] ). The requirements of a police confirmatory identification were met, in that the officer at issue carefully observed defendant at close range throughout the drug transaction and made a prompt identification as part of a planned procedure (see People v. Houston, 47 AD3d 424 [1st Dept 2008], lv denied 10 NY3d 841 [2008]; compare People v. Boyer, 6 NY3d 427 [2006] ). The officer also transmitted a detailed and accurate description of defendant. In any event, any error was harmless because this officer's identification of defendant was cumulative to that of the undercover officer, and it added little to the People's otherwise overwhelming case (see People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230 [1975] ).
We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.
_
CLERK
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: 1119 7 2467N 07
Decided: December 03, 2013
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)