Opinion
March 14, 1997.
Judgment unanimously affirmed.
Present — Green, J.P., Lawton, Callahan, Boehm and Fallon, JJ.
The evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the People ( see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621), is sufficient to establish defendant's constructive possession of the cocaine seized from 247A Langfield Drive ( see, People v Myrick, 203 AD2d 902; People v Campbell, 187 AD2d 945, lv denied 81 NY2d 786; People v Fuller,
168 AD2d 972, 973, lv denied 78 NY2d 922). The lease, telephone bill and letter were properly admitted for the limited purpose of linking defendant to that address ( see, People v Boswell, 167 AD2d 928, lv denied 77 NY2d 876, lv dismissed 81 NY2d 785). County Court also properly admitted the response of defendant to routine booking questions regarding her residence ( see, People v Rodney, 85 NY2d 289, 293). We reject the contention that prosecutorial misconduct deprived defendant of a fair trial. (Appeal from Judgment of Erie County Court, McCarthy, J. — Criminal Possession Controlled Substance, 4th Degree.)