People v Oquendo
2021 NY Slip Op 06515 [199 AD3d 1481]
November 19, 2021
Appellate Division, Fourth Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
As corrected through Wednesday, December 29, 2021


[*1]
 The People of the State of New York, Respondent,
v
Esteban Oquendo, Appellant.

Timothy P. Donaher, Public Defender, Rochester, Jeffrey Wicks, PLLC (Jeffrey Wicks of counsel), for defendant-appellant.

Sandra Doorley, District Attorney, Rochester (Lisa Gray of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Alex R. Renzi, J.), rendered October 28, 2016. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a jury verdict, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon a jury verdict, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (Penal Law § 220.16 [1]). Contrary to defendant's contention, we conclude that Supreme Court did not abuse its discretion in permitting the People to introduce evidence that his codefendant was in possession of a loaded gun inasmuch as the probative value of the evidence was not " 'substantially outweighed by the potential for prejudice' " (People v Harris, 26 NY3d 1, 5 [2015], quoting People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 425 [2004], cert denied 542 US 946 [2004]).

Viewing the evidence in light of the elements of the crime as charged to the jury (see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 349 [2007]), we reject defendant's contention that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence (see People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]).

The sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. Finally, we have reviewed defendant's remaining contention and conclude that it is without merit. Present—Whalen, P.J., Smith, Lindley, Curran and DeJoseph, JJ.