From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Linares

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 20, 2003
305 A.D.2d 259 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

1173

May 20, 2003.

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (David Stadtmauer, J.), rendered July 26, 2001, 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 7½ to 15 years and 1 year, unanimously affirmed.

Lara R. Binimow, for respondent.

Lisa Joy Robertson, for defendant-appellant.

Before: Nardelli, J.P., Saxe, Sullivan, Wallach, Gonzalez, JJ.


The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Issues of credibility and identification were properly considered by the trier of facts and there is no basis for disturbing its determinations (see People v. Gaimari, 176 N.Y. 84, 94). We do not find the undercover officer's account of the transaction to be implausible.

Since defendant's arguments at the Hinton hearing were completely different from those he now raises on appeal, defendant's contention that the courtroom was improperly closed to the general public during the undercover officer's testimony is unpreserved ( see People v. Lugo, 233 A.D.2d 197, lv denied 89 N.Y.2d 1037), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that the People made a sufficiently particularized showing to warrant closure in that the undercover officer continued to work in the area of defendant's arrest, had pending cases in the courthouse, had unapprehended suspects remaining at large from the area of defendant's arrest and took precautions when testifying (see People v. Ramos, 90 N.Y.2d 490, 498, cert denied 522 U.S. 1002). We also note that a relative of defendant was permitted to remain throughout the proceedings.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.

Motion seeking leave to hold appeal in abeyance denied.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

People v. Linares

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 20, 2003
305 A.D.2d 259 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

People v. Linares

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. OLAVI LINARES…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: May 20, 2003

Citations

305 A.D.2d 259 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
759 N.Y.S.2d 76

Citing Cases

Linares v. People

On May 20, 2003, the Appellate Division denied Linares' motion. It affirmed unanimously the judgment of…

Linares v. People

Petitioner timely appealed his conviction to the New York State Appellate Division, First Department, which…