Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court properly admitted limited expert testimony concerning the general practices of drug dealers. The testimony was admitted to explain to the jury why the defendant, who was observed to have been working with another individual who was not apprehended, did not have the "buy money" or controlled substance on his person when he was arrested shortly after he sold crack cocaine...
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.
