People v. Fisher
Opinion of the Court
—Judgment, Supreme
Defendant’s legal sufficiency claim is unpreserved and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. As an alternative holding, we reject it on the merits. We also find that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348-349 [2007]). There is no basis for disturbing the jury’s credibility determinations. The police account of the transaction was not implausible, and the evidence does not support defendant’s suggestion that he may have been the buyer rather than the seller.
We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, DeGrasse, Richter and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.