PEOPLE v. BLACKSHEAR

Reset A A Font size: Print

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

The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. John BLACKSHEAR, appellant.

Decided: October 31, 2005

THOMAS A. ADAMS, J.P., DANIEL F. LUCIANO, PETER B. SKELOS, and ROBERT A. LIFSON, JJ. Robert C. Mitchell, Riverhead, N.Y. (Robert B. Kenney of counsel), for appellant, and appellant pro se. Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Guy Arcidiacono and Cameron Kenny of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Kerins, J.), rendered September 26, 2002, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts) and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that the trial court's closure of the courtroom during the testimony of four undercover officers deprived him of his right to a public trial is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05[2];  People v. Thomas, 298 A.D.2d 535, 748 N.Y.S.2d 667) and, in any event, is without merit (see People v. Ramos, 90 N.Y.2d 490, 662 N.Y.S.2d 739, 685 N.E.2d 492, cert. denied 522 U.S. 1002, 118 S.Ct. 574, 139 L.Ed.2d 413;  People v. Smith, 282 A.D.2d 626, 627, 723 N.Y.S.2d 396;  People v. Rodriguez, 258 A.D.2d 483, 685 N.Y.S.2d 252).

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 the evidence 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 of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15[5] ).

The defendant's remaining contention raised in his supplemental pro se brief is without merit.

Copied to clipboard