Court Opinion

ID: 6078967
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-13 18:35:28.458629+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:53:08.000660
License: Public Domain

—Appeal by the de*740fendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Mullen, J.), rendered September 14, 1998, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant’s contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish his guilt of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).
The defendant’s contention that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel is without merit (see, People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708; People v Flores, 84 NY2d 184; People v Satterfield, 66 NY2d 796; People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137; People v Wicker, 229 AD2d 602; People v Sullivan, 153 AD2d 223).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).
The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Bracken, P. J., McGinity, Luciano and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.