People v. Harris
| Decision Date | 09 April 1969 |
| Citation | 300 N.Y.S.2d 589,24 N.Y.2d 810 |
| Parties | , 248 N.E.2d 444 PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. William John HARRIS, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, 28 A.D.2d 1174, 284 N.Y.S.2d 638.
Charles B. Sakofsky, So. Fallsburg, for appellant.
Louis B. Scheinman, Dist. Atty. (Carl J. Silverstein, Asst. Dist. Atty., Monticello, of counsel), for respondent.
Indictment and bill of particulars charged that on certain date defendant sold heroin to undercover investigator. The undercover investigator testified that he had asked defendant to get heroin for him, that defendant asked for $15, and that undercover investigator said that he would wait and gave defendant the money, and that defendant returned in an hour and gave him the heroin, and that no one except the two of them were present at any time. The defendant testified that undercover investigator and third person approached him, and that undercover investigator asked him to get something for him and gave him money, and that defendant then went to another person, gave him the money, and obtained the narcotics, and that defendant, gave him the money and obtained the narcotics and then gave the narcotics to the undercover investigator, and the third person.
The defendant was convicted of selling a narcotic drug.
The County Court, Sullivan County, Benjamin Newberg, J., rendered judgment, and the defendant appealed.
The Appellate Division entered a judgment November 20, 1967 affirming the judgment of the County Court.
The defendant appealed to the Court of Appeals by permission of an Associate Judge of the Court of Appeals, contended on the basis of either version of what took place, the defendant acted only as an agent of the undercover investigator.
Judgment affirmed.
All concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Lam Lek Chong
...637, 255 N.Y.S.2d 862, 204 N.E.2d 196; People v. Hollins, 19 N.Y.2d 864, 280 N.Y.S.2d 594, 227 N.E.2d 407; People v. Harris, 24 N.Y.2d 810, 300 N.Y.S.2d 589, 248 N.E.2d 444; People v. Hingerton, 26 N.Y.2d 790, 309 N.Y.S.2d 218, 257 N.E.2d 662; People v. Jenkins, 41 N.Y.2d 307, 392 N.Y.S.2d ......
-
People v. Roche
...3 Cir., 371 F.2d 800, 806-807), bargaining over price (United States v. Winfield, 2 Cir., 341 F.2d 70, 71; cf. People v. Harris, 24 N.Y.2d 810, 300 N.Y.S.2d 589, 248 N.E.2d 444) and apologizing for the quality of drugs or the manner of their delivery (United States v. Winfield, supra, p. 71......
-
People v. Rankin
...as to whether defendant was acting as agent, the question is for the jury (People v. Harris, 28 A.D.2d 1174, 284 N.Y.S.2d 638, affd., 24 N.Y.2d 810, 300 N.Y.2d 589, 248 N.E.2d 444; People v. Fuller, 34 A.D.2d 852, 310 N.Y.S.2d Although defendant denied delivering narcotics to Scirri in any ......
-
People v. Robert W
...the jury (People v. Fuller, 34 A.D.2d 852, 310 N.Y.S.2d 535; People v. Harris, 28 A.D.2d 1174, 284 N.Y.S.2d 638, affd. 24 N.Y.2d 810, 300 N.Y.S.2d 589, 248 N.E.2d 444; People v. Pulliam, 28 A.D.2d 786, 281 N.Y.S.2d 137). The testimony in this case provides ample evidence for the jury to con......