People v. Sinkler

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him after a jury trial of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (Penal Law § 220.39 [1]). Defendant contends that the evidence is legally insufficient to support the conviction because his codefendant transacted the sale of cocaine to an undercover State Trooper and a confidential informant (see, People v Alvie J., 286 AD2d 930). We disagree. There is a “valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences which could lead a rational person to the conclusion” reached by the jury (People…