People v. Norfleet
| Decision Date | 30 January 1989 |
| Citation | 146 A.D.2d 812,537 N.Y.S.2d 289 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE, etc., Respondent, v. Jerry Lee NORFLEET, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Alvin L. Spitzer, New City (Catherine Ventry, of counsel), for appellant.
Kenneth Gribetz, Dist. Atty., New City (Sondra S. Holt, of counsel), for respondent.
Before BRACKEN, J.P., and KUNZEMAN, EIBER and KOOPER, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Rockland County (Edelstein, J.), dated July 17, 1986, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree (two counts), criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (three counts), and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the People failed to prove that he knowingly possessed and sold lysergic acid diethylamide (hereinafter LSD). Viewing the evidence adduced at trial in a light most favorable to the People (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 support the conviction. The People proved that the defendant made four sales of LSD to an undercover officer over a period of several weeks. Prior to each sale, the undercover officer asked the defendant for "mesc", a shortened version of the word mescaline, which the evidence showed was then the street name for LSD. To fill the orders, the defendant drove to New York City, where he contacted his suppliers, and obtained LSD, which he then sold to the undercover officer. The defendant's ongoing experience buying and selling LSD evidenced his involvement in drug trafficking and warrants the inference that he was familiar with the fact that LSD was sold on the street as "mescaline". We conclude that the evidence was sufficient to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant knowingly possessed and sold LSD (see, People v. Green, 35 N.Y.2d 437, 442-443, 363 N.Y.S.2d 910, 323 N.E.2d 160; People v. Reisman, 29 N.Y.2d 278, 327 N.Y.S.2d 342, 277 N.E.2d 396; People v. Niven, 135 A.D.2d 1088, 523 N.Y.S.2d 306, app. denied 70 N.Y.2d 958, 525 N.Y.S.2d 842, 520 N.E.2d 560; cf., People v. Tramuta, 109 A.D.2d 765, 486 N.Y.S.2d 82).
The sentence imposed was not...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Nelson
...that "[s]entences imposed after trial may be more severe than those proposed in connection with a plea" (People v. Norfleet, 146 A.D.2d 812, 813, 537 N.Y.S.2d 289; see, People v. Harris, 162 A.D.2d 195, 556 N.Y.S.2d 320). Moreover, while there is a substantial disparity between the defendan......
-
People v. Chesnard
...as part of a proposed plea agreement (see, People v. Oliver, 63 N.Y.2d 973, 483 N.Y.S.2d 992, 473 N.E.2d 242; People v. Norfleet, 146 A.D.2d 812, 537 N.Y.S.2d 289). Also, the mere speculation that due to his advanced age or his prior health problems, the defendant might suffer harm if incar......
-
People v. Sutton
...N.Y.2d 400, 411-412, 429 N.Y.S.2d 410, 406 N.E.2d 1347, cert. denied 449 U.S. 1087, 101 S.Ct. 878, 66 L.Ed.2d 814; People v. Norfleet, 146 A.D.2d 812, 813, 537 N.Y.S.2d 289; People v. Cunningham, 153 A.D.2d 700, 544 N.Y.S.2d 871; People v. Marrero, 110 A.D.2d 785, 786, 487 N.Y.S.2d 853), an......
-
People v. Clarke
...after trial may be more severe than those proposed in connection with a plea bargain (see, People v. Nelson, supra; People v. Norfleet, 146 A.D.2d 812, 813, 537 N.Y.S.2d 289). Moreover, we conclude that the sentence imposed upon the defendant was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D......