Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the undercover police officer to whom he sold a glassine envelope containing narcotics should have been produced to testify at his trial, since this officer was the principal witness to the narcotics transaction as well as to the identity of the glassine envelope introduced at trial.
The defendant further claims that it was error for the trial court to have let an observing police officer testify...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.