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, etc., respondent, v. Michael JOHNSON, appellant.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Erlbaum, J.), rendered June 5, 1998, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
A police officer testified that he observed the defendant accept United States currency from an individual named Milton Holder, after which the defendant dropped envelopes on the ground which Holder retrieved. Holder and the defendant were subsequently arrested, and a bag containing cocaine was found in Holder's shoe.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15[5] ).
The Supreme Court did not err in admitting into evidence the bag found in Holder's shoe because the bag was “sufficiently connected with the [defendant] to be relevant to an issue in the case” (People v. Mason, 186 A.D.2d 590, 591, 588 N.Y.S.2d 387; People v. Connelly, 35 N.Y.2d 171, 174, 359 N.Y.S.2d 266, 316 N.E.2d 706). The court also did not err in denying a circumstantial evidence charge because the prosecutor's case relied on both direct and circumstantial evidence (see, People v. Burgos, 170 A.D.2d 689, 567 N.Y.S.2d 103).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Thank you for your feedback!
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.
Decided: March 20, 2000
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)