The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There was extensive proof of defendant's accessorial liability, including evidence supporting the conclusion that defendant passed an unidentified object to a second man, and that this object was the packet of drugs that the second man immediately sold to an undercover officer.
The court properly permitted the undercover officers to identify themselves by their shield...
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.
