The evidence at trial established that after an undercover officer asked the codefendant for "nicks", defendant interrupted the transaction, and not recognizing the undercover, asked him from whom he had purchased previously. After the undercover assured them that he had purchased drugs in that building before, defendant directed the codefendant to "give them to" the undercover. Viewing this evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution, and giving them the benefit...
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.
