Opinion
June 8, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Felice Shea, J.).
Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the People ( People v. Malizia, 62 N.Y.2d 755, cert denied 469 U.S. 932), there is no reason to disturb the jury's determination in this "buy and bust" case where the undercover officers' and arresting officers' testimony firmly established the defendant's identity as the seller ( People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490). The prosecution's statement that the arresting officer would testify to the confirmatory identification made by the undercover, and the arresting officer's actual testimony to that effect, did not amount to improper bolstering ( People v. Chapman, 202 A.D.2d 297, lv denied 83 N.Y.2d 965). In any event, the trial court immediately struck the complained of testimony.
We have considered all other claims and find them to be meritless.
Concur — Ross, J.P., Nardelli, Williams, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.