Viewed in a light most favorable to the People (People v Malizia, 62 N.Y.2d 755, cert denied 469 U.S. 932), the evidence that the defendant exchanged drugs for money and was in possession of $10 of the prerecorded buy money when arrested was sufficient as a matter of law to support the verdict (see, People v. Hawkins, 188 A.D.2d 489, lv denied 81 N.Y.2d 840). Moreover, upon an independent review of the facts, we find that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490). The issues raised by defendant concerning the credibility of the undercover officer's identification, including those that arose by any omissions and inaccuracies in his description of defendant to the backup officer, the attempted flight of a second woman at the scene of the arrest, the absence of drugs on defendant's person and her possession of only a portion of the buy money, were properly placed before the jury (see, People v. Perez, 189 A.D.2d 562, lv denied 81 N.Y.2d 975; People v. Bobbitt, 180 A.D.2d 489, 490, lv denied 79 N.Y.2d 1046), and, after considering the competing inferences that may be drawn therefrom, we find no reason on the record before us to disturb its determination. Nor do we perceive any abuse of sentencing discretion.
We modify to dismiss the possession count in the interest of justice, arising as it did out of defendant's possession of the same drugs as were involved in the sale count (People v. Gaul, 63 A.D.2d 563, lv denied 45 N.Y.2d 780).
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Ellerin, Kupferman, Ross and Tom, JJ.