609 N.Y.S.2d 212 | N.Y. App. Div. | 1994
—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Bernard Fried, J.), rendered May 13, 1992, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, and sentencing her, as a second felony offender, to a term of 2 Vi to 5 years, and time served, respectively, unanimously affirmed.
Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the People and giving them the benefit of every reasonable inference (People v Malizia, 62 NY2d 755, 757, cert denied 469 US 932), defendant’s guilt was proven beyond a reasonable doubt by
Defendant’s claim that the court’s instructions near the end of its charge that the jury "should make every effort to come to [an] agreement which speaks the truth as far as this case is concerned” diluted the People’s burden of proof is not preserved for review as a matter of law (CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Ellis, 184 AD2d 307, 308, lv denied 80 NY2d 929). In any event, were we to review the claim in the interest of justice, we would find that the charge as a whole conveyed the appropriate legal standards concerning the People’s burden of proof (see, People v Rosa, 187 AD2d 355, 356, lv denied 81 NY2d 892). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Kupferman, Rubin and Williams, JJ.