Legal Opinion
People v. Paz
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided March 16, 1990PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant contends that the evidence was legally insufficient to convict him because the proof at trial established that he was entrapped into committing the sales of cocaine to the undercover officer and that he was merely acting as the agent of the informant. Whether a defendant is predisposed to commit an offense or was induced to commit the offense is a question of fact for the jury (see, People v McGee, 49 NY2d 48, 61, cert denied 446 US 942; People v Sundholm, 58 AD2d 224, 227). Likewise, whether a defendant acted as an agent of the buyer or as…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- People v. Lam Lek ChongNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
- People v. McGeeNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
- People v. SundholmAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1977
- People v. RankinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1976
- People v. HughesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
3Cited by8 opinions
- People v. WilliamsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
- People v. HernerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
- People v. AlbertAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
- People v. ThomasAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
- People v. GlogowskiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.