Opinion
November 19, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Irene Duffy, J.).
Defendant was arrested for selling narcotics to an undercover police officer. At the pre-trial hearing, the court ruled that it would allow testimony relative to three uncharged drug sales to demonstrate that the defendant had acted in concert with his accomplice. The defendant argues that this evidence unduly influenced the jury and thus denied him a fair trial. This objection is unpreserved and, in any event, is without merit. The People properly used evidence of the three uncharged drug sales to demonstrate that the defendant had acted in concert with his accomplice. (People v Jackson, 39 N.Y.2d 64, 68.) During the three uncharged sales, the defendant directed the prospective purchasers and received buy money from his accomplice. These other crimes are "inextricably interwoven" with the facts of the crime charged, and their probative value outweighs the potential for prejudice, if any (People v Ely, 68 N.Y.2d 520, 529).
Considering the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt (People v Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230), we find any prejudicial error in the prosecutor's summation to have been harmless, and further note that the claim was, in any event, not preserved.
Concur — Carro, J.P., Rosenberger, Wallach and Ross, JJ.