| People v Faulk |
| 2015 NY Slip Op 02195 [126 AD3d 564] |
| March 19, 2015 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
[*1]
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Alfonzo Faulk, Appellant. |
Steven Banks, The Legal Aid Society, New York (Harold V. Ferguson, Jr. ofcounsel), for appellant.
Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., District Attorney, New York (Manu K. Balachandran ofcounsel), for respondent.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Arlene R. Silverman, J.), renderedOctober 15, 2007, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of acontrolled substance in the fourth degree and three counts of criminally using drugparaphernalia in the second degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, toan aggregate term of 2
The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weightof the evidence. There is no basis upon which to disturb the jury's determinationsconcerning credibility. Defendant's proximity to cocaine, crack pipes and a scale withcocaine residue, all in open view, in the back bedroom of an apartment in which 1000glassine envelopes were found in a storage area, permitted the jury to reasonably inferthat defendant exercised dominion and control over the cocaine in that bedroom (seee.g. People v Perez, 259 AD2d 274 [1st Dept 1999], lv denied 93NY2d 976 [1999]). Moreover, the inference that defendant was the person in charge ofthe drug activity in that apartment was corroborated by evidence subsequently recoveredfrom defendant's own apartment in the same building.
Defendant was also properly convicted under the drug factory presumption(see Penal Law § 220.25 [2]), which the court correctly submitted tothe jury. The evidence, and reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom, establishedeach of the elements of that presumption, and defendant's arguments to the contrary arewithout merit.
We have considered and rejected defendant's remaining claims.Concur—Tom, J.P., Acosta, Andrias, Moskowitz and Kapnick, JJ.