Opinion
December 29, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Greenberg, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant Ian Bonney was one of two men who took part in selling narcotics to an undercover officer on June 25, 1993 (see, People v Keller, 222 A.D.2d 698 [decided herewith]).
The defendant's claim that the trial court improperly marshaled the evidence in the prosecution's favor is meritless. The court is not required to explain all of the contentions of both parties, or outline all inconsistencies in the evidence (see, People v. Saunders, 64 N.Y.2d 665). Rather, it is required only to provide, in its discretion, a sufficient statement of facts to explain, as far as is practicable, the application of the law to the facts (see, CPL 300.10; People v. Geattys, 200 A.D.2d 585). We find no improvident exercise of that discretion here.
The defendant's sentence was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Thompson, J.P., Friedmann, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.