PEOPLE v. CAMERON

Reset A A Font size: Print

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

PEOPLE of the State of New York, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Larry CAMERON, Defendant-Appellant.

Decided: April 28, 2006

PRESENT:  HURLBUTT, J.P., GORSKI, MARTOCHE, SMITH, AND GREEN, JJ. Charles J. Greenberg, Buffalo, for Defendant-Appellant. Cindy F. Intschert, District Attorney, Watertown (Kristyna S. Mills of Counsel), for Plaintiff-Respondent.

On appeal from a judgment convicting him following a jury trial of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (Penal Law § 220.39[1] ) and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (§ 220.16[1] ), defendant contends that the conviction is not supported by legally sufficient evidence.   We reject that contention (see generally People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672).   The confidential informant and various police officers identified defendant at trial, and the confidential informant testified that he purchased drugs from defendant.   In addition, at least two of the officers who identified defendant testified that they were familiar with him based on prior encounters with him.   Thus, it cannot be said that the evidence is legally insufficient to support the conviction (see People v. Golden, 24 A.D.3d 806, 804 N.Y.S.2d 496;  People v. Wright, 13 A.D.3d 726, 727-728, 786 N.Y.S.2d 234, lv. denied 5 N.Y.3d 857, 806 N.Y.S.2d 177, 840 N.E.2d 146).   Also contrary to defendant's contention, the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see generally Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d at 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672).

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

MEMORANDUM: