Opinion
March 10, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Felice K. Shea, J.).
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People and giving them the benefit of every reasonable inference (People v. Malizia, 62 N.Y.2d 755, cert denied 469 U.S. 932), we find that the evidence was sufficient as a matter of law to support the verdict. Moreover, upon an independent review of the facts, we find that the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490). The issues raised by defendant concerning the credibility of the prosecution's police witness, including inconsistencies in his testimony, the fact that no drugs or money were found on defendant's person at the time of arrest, and the testimony of the two accused buyers that defendant was not the person who had sold them drugs, were properly before the fact finder and, after considering the relative force of the conflicting testimony and the competing inferences that may be drawn therefrom, we find no reason on the record before us to disturb the court's determination.
The stationhouse identification of defendant was confirmatory in nature, made as it was by a trained police officer within 30 minutes after having observed defendant selling drugs, an observation made with binoculars for 5 to 7 minutes without interruption or obstruction, and thus properly admitted (see, People v. Francis, 139 A.D.2d 527, 528, lv denied 72 N.Y.2d 859).
Nor was it error to allow this police witness to briefly testify as an expert about the practices and patterns of 2 and 3 person drug-selling teams in order to explain why no drugs or money were found on defendant at the time of arrest (see, People v. Matos, 165 A.D.2d 767, 768, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 988).
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Carro, Ellerin, Wallach and Nardelli, JJ.