Court Opinion

ID: 6094028
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-13 20:13:20.255159+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:52:39.403807
License: Public Domain

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rosenzweig, J.), rendered *610February 16, 2001, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (five counts), robbery in the second degree (five counts), criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree (two counts), and criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (three counts), 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 beyond a reasonable doubt is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10 [1995]; People v Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245 [1989]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), 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 remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review, without merit, or do not require reversal. S. Miller, J.P., Goldstein, Adams and Rivera, JJ., concur.