The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence (see People v. Bello, 92 N.Y.2d 523). The evidence, including the recovery of buy money from defendant and his statement to the police, permitted a reasonable inference that defendant was a participant in the drug transaction, whose function was to hold the proceeds of the sale.
The court properly denied defendant's request for a missing witness charge as to a police sergeant involved in the process of vouchering evidence. The court correctly determined that the request was untimely and that the witness's testimony would have been cumulative (People v. Gonzalez, 68 N.Y.2d 424, 428).
We have considered and rejected defendant's remaining claims.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.