People v. Fraser
| Decision Date | 02 December 2015 |
| Citation | 22 N.Y.S.3d 70,134 A.D.3d 734 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Reginald FRASER, appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
134 A.D.3d 734
22 N.Y.S.3d 70
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent,
v.
Reginald FRASER, appellant.
Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Dec. 2, 2015.
Robert C. Mitchell, Riverhead, N.Y. (Kirk R. Brandt of counsel), for appellant.
Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Edward A. Bannan of counsel), for respondent.
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., THOMAS A. DICKERSON, ROBERT J. MILLER, and JOSEPH J. MALTESE, JJ.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Iliou, J.), rendered October 2, 2013, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (three counts) and criminal sale of a controlled
substance in the first degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish his guilt is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05[2] ; People v. Hawkins, 11 N.Y.3d 484, 492–493, 872 N.Y.S.2d 395, 900 N.E.2d 946 ). In any event, 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 (see CPL 470.15 [5] ), we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v. Romero, 7 N.Y.3d 633, 826 N.Y.S.2d 163, 859 N.E.2d 902 ). The issue of whether the affirmative defense of entrapment was established was an issue of fact for the jury (see People v. McGee, 49 N.Y.2d 48, 61, 424 N.Y.S.2d 157, 399 N.E.2d 1177 ; People v. Gordon, 72 A.D.3d 841, 842, 898 N.Y.S.2d 257 ; People v. Wicht, 48 A.D.3d 491, 851 N.Y.S.2d 266 ; People v. Castro, 299 A.D.2d 557, 558, 750 N.Y.S.2d 510 ). Here, the evidence presented at trial, which included recorded conversations between the defendant and an undercover officer, supported the jury's rejection of the affirmative defense of entrapment (see People v. Jones, 114 A.D.3d 1239, 1240, 980 N.Y.S.2d 670 ; People v. Gordon, 72 A.D.3d at 842, 898 N.Y.S.2d 257 ; People v. Kubasek, 167 A.D.2d 424, 562 N.Y.S.2d 452 ).
The defendant's contention that the verdict was repugnant is unpreserved for appellate review (see People v. Alfaro, 66 N.Y.2d 985, 987, 499 N.Y.S.2d 378, 489 N.E.2d 1280 ; People v. Satloff, 56 N.Y.2d 745, 746, 452 N.Y.S.2d 12, 437 N.E.2d 271 ). In any event, this contention is without merit (see People v. DeLee, 24 N.Y.3d 603, 608, 2 N.Y.S.3d 382, 26 N.E.3d 210 ; People v. White, 172 A.D.2d 790, 569 N.Y.S.2d 161 ; People v. Gonzalez, 156 A.D.2d 711, 712, 549 N.Y.S.2d 463 ).
The County Court correctly denied the defendant's request to instruct the jury on the affirmative defense of duress (see Penal Law §...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Jackson
...750, 536 N.Y.S.2d 730, 533 N.E.2d 660 ; People v. Watts , 57 N.Y.2d 299, 301, 456 N.Y.S.2d 677, 442 N.E.2d 1188 ; People v. Fraser , 134 A.D.3d 734, 735, 22 N.Y.S.3d 70 ). Contrary to the defendant's contention, no reasonable view of the evidence supported a finding that he was subjected to......
-
People v. Folk
...charging the jury with this affirmative defense (see People v. Jackson , 172 A.D.3d 748, 749, 97 N.Y.S.3d 493 ; People v. Fraser , 134 A.D.3d 734, 735, 22 N.Y.S.3d 70 ). "A defense of duress may not be used when the force or threat used is incapable of immediate realization" ( People v. Ama......
-
People v. Rampersad
...the error contributed to his conviction (see People v. Hall, 18 N.Y.3d at 132, 936 N.Y.S.2d 630, 960 N.E.2d 399 ; People v. Fraser, 134 A.D.3d 734, 736, 22 N.Y.S.3d 70 ; People v. Wilkins, 75 A.D.3d 847, 849, 904 N.Y.S.2d 820 ).The defendant's remaining contention is unpreserved for appella......
-
People v. Caldara
...782, 610 N.Y.S.2d 949, 632 N.E.2d 1272 ; People v. Roche , 45 N.Y.2d 78, 82–83, 407 N.Y.S.2d 682, 379 N.E.2d 208 ; People v. Fraser , 134 A.D.3d 734, 735, 22 N.Y.S.3d 70 ; People v. Shodunke , 12 A.D.3d 466, 783 N.Y.S.2d 822 ).The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v. Suitte , 9......