People v. HarrisPeople v. Harris
It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: In appeal No. 1, defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon a jury verdict, of four counts each of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (
The contention of defendant that his conviction in appeal No. 1 is not based on legally sufficient evidence is not preserved for our review (see People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10, 19 [1995]; see also People v Hines, 97 NY2d 56, 61 [2001], rearg denied 97 NY2d 678 [2001]). In any event, that contention lacks merit. We note that, at trial, the People offered the testimony of an informant who testified as to four controlled drug buys he made from defendant on four different occasions, and offered evidence obtained through eavesdropping warrants that confirmed the drug activity of defendant. We also reject defendant‘s contention that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence.
By failing to move to withdraw his plea in appeal No. 2, defendant failed to preserve for our review his contentions that the plea was not knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily entered and was factually insufficient (see People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 665 [1988]; People v DeJesus, 248 AD2d 1023 [1998], lv denied 92 NY2d 878 [1998]). We decline to exercise our power to review those contentions as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v MARK J. HARRIS, Appellant. (Appeal No. 2.) [788 NYS2d 921]
Appeal from a judgment of the Onondaga County Court (Anthony F. Aloi, J.), rendered December 20, 2002. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the second degree.
It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.
Same memorandum as in People v Harris (15 AD3d 966 [2005]). Present—Green, J.P., Scudder, Gorski, Lawton and Hayes, JJ.