From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Paz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 4, 1990
168 A.D.2d 220 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

December 4, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Ira Globerman, J.).


Defendant was arrested for selling $10 of crack to undercover Police Officer Ponce on July 28, 1988. Subsequent to the arrest, the arresting officer searched the defendant and recovered the prerecorded "buy" money, three vials of cocaine and six bags of marihuana. On appeal, defendant argues that it was error to permit two of the field team officers to testify at trial to the description of the suspect given by undercover Officer Ponce.

To the extent that this testimony may have constituted hearsay, any error must be deemed harmless in view of the overwhelming evidence of defendant's guilt (People v. Candelario, 156 A.D.2d 191, lv. denied 75 N.Y.2d 964; People v. Jones, 158 A.D.2d 346, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 737), including the eyewitness testimony of Officer Ponce, the observations of a backup officer who also observed the sale, and defendant's possession of the prerecorded "buy" money.

Defendant's claim of "bolstering" was not preserved, the objection stated having been no more than the one word "objection" (People v. Love, 57 N.Y.2d 1023).

Concur — Ross, J.P., Carro, Milonas, Rosenberger and Asch, JJ.


Summaries of

People v. Paz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 4, 1990
168 A.D.2d 220 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

People v. Paz

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. JOE PAZ, Appellant

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

Date published: Dec 4, 1990

Citations

168 A.D.2d 220 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
562 N.Y.S.2d 107

Citing Cases

People v. Larry

Defendant's argument that the introduction of his arrest photo improperly bolstered the complainants'…