| People v Ramos |
| 2012 NY Slip Op 00821 [92 AD3d 445] |
| February 7, 2012 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Miguel Ramos, Appellant. |
—[*1] Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (John B.F. Martin of counsel), forrespondent.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Patricia Nunez, J.), rendered February 25,2010, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance inthe fourth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony drug offender, to a term of five years,unanimously affirmed.
The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of theevidence (see People v Danielson, 9NY3d 342, 348 [2007]). The circumstances, viewed as a whole, supported the conclusionthat defendant was a participant in a drug-selling operation being conducted out of a vacantapartment, and that he was a possessor of a large quantity of drugs contained in a knapsack in theapartment (see People v Jones, 72AD3d 452 [2010], lv denied 15 NY3d 806 [2010]).
The People's summation did not deprive defendant of his right to a fair trial. Given thecontext, the prosecutor's reference to the dangers of undercover police work was not a "safestreets" argument (see People vBrown, 17 NY3d 742, 743 [2011]). Instead, this line of argument was a permissiblerebuttal to defendant's argument that the police paperwork was inadequate (see People vChandler, 265 AD2d 239 [1999], lv denied 94 NY2d 902 [2000]). The prosecutor'scomment on the codefendant's absence at trial was improper, but this isolated error was not soprejudicial as to warrant a new trial, particularly since the court's jury charge included anadmonition to draw no inference from the codefendant's absence. Defendant's remainingchallenges to the prosecutor's summation are unpreserved (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 911, 912 [2006]), and we decline toreview them in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we find no basis for reversal(see People v Overlee, 236 AD2d 133 [1997], lv denied 91 NY2d 976 [1998];People v D'Alessandro, 184 AD2d 114, 118-119 [1992], lv denied 81 NY2d 884[1993]).
We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias,DeGrasse and Richter, Abdus-Salaam JJ.