Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the prosecution failed to prove his guilt by legally sufficient evidence because the undercover officers' testimony was so replete with inconsistencies that it was incredible as a matter of law. However, because the defense did not move for dismissal until after summations, these arguments are unpreserved for appellate review (see People v Romero,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.