People v. Rosado

• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
• Writing for the Court: Before CARRO
• Citation: People v. Rosado, 595 N.Y.S.2d 20, 191 A.D.2d 262 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
• Decision Date: 11 March 1993
• Parties: The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Ramon ROSADO, Defendant-Appellant.

Page 20

595 N.Y.S.2d 20

191 A.D.2d 262

The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Ramon ROSADO, Defendant-Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division First Department.

March 11, 1993.

Before CARRO, J.P., and ELLERIN, WALLACH, KASSAL and RUBIN, JJ.

MEMORANDUM DECISION.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Irene Duffy, J.), rendered June 28, 1989, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of imprisonment of 5 1/2 to 11 years and one year, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant was arrested for the sale and possession of cocaine during a buy and bust operation. At trial, the undercover officer testified that he wrote a description of the defendant on an envelope and that later at the precinct, he used the arresting officer's arrest report and the description he had written on the envelope to complete his buy report. He then discarded the envelope.

Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution (People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 467 N.Y.S.2d 349, 454 N.E.2d 932), we find it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. This is true despite the fact that no prerecorded buy money was recovered from defendant (People v. Johnson, 187 A.D.2d 404, 590 N.Y.S.2d 437). Moreover, upon a factual review, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence.

Defendant's claim that he is entitled to a new trial because the court failed to impose sanctions upon the People for the undercover officer's destruction of the envelope is unpreserved for appellate review, and we decline to reach the issue in the interest of justice. In any event, defendant's identification was clearly...