PEOPLE v. CHARRIEZ

This prosecution arose out of a "buy and bust" operation in which an undercover officer purchased two glassine bags of heroin, with a specific logo, from co-defendant for $20 in buy bills. The undercover officer contacted the backup unit, and the arresting officer, moments later, saw the co-defendant hand money to defendant. At that moment, focusing on the co-defendant, the arresting officer directed the parties not to move. When defendant saw the officer, he dropped two glassine bags from his hand. Ten more glassine bags of heroin, the $20 in buy money, and a bag of cocaine were recovered from defendant himself.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People, and giving due deference to the jury's findings of credibility (People v Malizia, 62 N.Y.2d 755, cert denied 469 U.S. 932) defendant's guilt was proved beyond a reasonable doubt by overwhelming evidence under the standards set forth in People v Bleakley ( 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495). The circumstances of this case, including the quantity of drugs recovered from defendant, the proximity in time and place between the original sale, the apprehension of the co-defendant, and the arresting officer's observations, supported the inference that defendant possessed the contraband with intent to sell (People v Alvino, 71 N.Y.2d 233).

The contraband abandoned by defendant was properly seized (Horton v California, 496 U.S. 128, 110 S Ct 2301). In any event, this evidence would have supported stopping defendant when co-defendant was detained (see, People v Leung, 68 N.Y.2d 734). We have examined defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be meritless.

Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Kupferman, Ross, Asch and Kassal, JJ.