Opinion
September 20, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Renee White, J.).
The evidence of defendant's orchestration of the drug selling operation was legally sufficient to support a finding that he had constructive possession, i.e., dominion and control, of the drugs recovered from his accomplice (see, People v. Bradley, 193 A.D.2d 385, lv denied 81 N.Y.2d 1070). Nor is there merit to defendant's argument that the court failed to meaningfully respond to a jury note by rereading portions of the original charge (People v Malloy, 55 N.Y.2d 296, cert denied 459 U.S. 847). The original instructions pertaining to the concepts of "acting in concert" and "constructive possession" were accurate, complete and constituted an adequate response to the jury's request for "an explanation of acting in concert as it relates to constructive possession."
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Wallach, Kupferman and Asch, JJ.