Opinion
December 13, 1990
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Harold Silverman, J.).
Defendant's conviction arises out of his arrest for the street sale of crack cocaine to an undercover officer in exchange for premarked currency. The exchange was observed by another officer, and the premarked currency and additional drugs were recovered from defendant's person at the scene.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People, defendant's guilt was proven beyond a reasonable doubt. (People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620.) The trier of fact is in the best position to observe the demeanor of the witnesses and assess their credibility. (People v. Mosley, 112 A.D.2d 812, 814, affd. 67 N.Y.2d 985.) No basis to disturb the jury's findings appears on this record.
Defendant now argues that he was denied his right of confrontation when, in his absence, a postcharge conference was held among the Trial Judge, defense counsel and the Assistant District Attorney, which was limited to noting defense counsel's exceptions to the court's charge to the jury. The conference cannot be considered a material stage of the trial (see, People v. Ciaccio, 47 N.Y.2d 431) at which defendant's absence, without objection before the trial court, affected any substantial right of the defendant (see, People v. Van, 161 A.D.2d 326, lv. denied 76 N.Y.2d 867), or bore any reasonably substantial relation to defendant's opportunity to defend against the charges (see, Snyder v. Massachusetts, 291 U.S. 97).
Concur — Carro, J.P., Asch, Kassal and Smith, JJ.