People v Branch
2009 NY Slip Op 05386 [63 AD3d 631]
June 30, 2009
Appellate Division, First Department
As corrected through Wednesday, August 5, 2009


The People of the State of New York, Respondent,
v
TirnnBranch, Appellant.

[*1]Steven Banks, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Jonathan Garelick of counsel), forappellant.

Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York (Yuval Simchi-Levi of counsel), forrespondent.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael A. Corriero, J.), rendered April 24,2007, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in thethird degree, criminal sale of a controlled substance in or near school grounds, and criminalpossession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felonydrug offender, to concurrent terms of 3½ years, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of theevidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis fordisturbing the jury's determinations concerning credibility. In this observation sale case, thetotality of defendant's interactions with the codefendant and with the buyers supports theconclusion that defendant took part in the transaction as part of a team of drug dealers (seePeople v Eduardo, 11 NY3d 484, 493 [2008]), and that he was a joint possessor of theadditional drugs found on the codefendant.

To the extent that a summation remark by the prosecutor could be viewed as improperlyimplying that the jury should draw an inference of guilt from the fact that defendant had beenindicted by a grand jury, we conclude that the court's instructions on the meaning of anindictment were sufficient to prevent any prejudice (see People v James, 197 AD2d 429[1993], lv denied 83 NY2d 806 [1994]). Defendant's remaining challenges to theprosecutor's summation are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice.As an alternative holding, we find no basis for reversal (see People v Overlee, 236 AD2d133 [1997], lv [*2]denied 91 NY2d 976 [1998];People v D'Alessandro, 184 AD2d 114, 118-119 [1992], lv denied 81 NY2d 884[1993]). Concur—Gonzalez, P.J., Friedman, Moskowitz, Renwick and Freedman, JJ.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.