PEOPLE v. PEREZ

To facilitate a drug sale, Juan Mangual told a police officer to see the defendant. The officer asked for "two" and defendant handed him one glassine envelope of heroin. Shortly thereafter, the field team arrested the defendant and Mangual.

Defendant contends that the People failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was guilty of the crimes charged. We disagree. The officer identified the defendant after the sale. Although he failed to notice that the defendant wore an earring, the significance of the failure was within the province of the jury (see, People v. Mosley, 112 A.D.2d 812, 815, affd 67 N.Y.2d 985). Similarly, it was for the jury to weigh the officer's inconsistent testimony about what the defendant did with the brown paper bag which contained the heroin (see, People v Trinidad, 177 A.D.2d 286, lv denied 79 N.Y.2d 865). Lastly, that defendant did not have the drugs or money on him approximately one half hour after the sale when he was arrested does not negate his guilt (People v. Walker, 186 A.D.2d 62).

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Carro, Wallach, Asch and Rubin, JJ.