Opinion
November 20, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Cohen, J.).
Ordered that the judgment and amended judgments are affirmed.
The defendant's contentions that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish his knowledge of the weight of the cocaine he possessed and that the court erred in failing to instruct the jury that the People must prove he knew the weight of the cocaine are unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10; People v Lawrence, 85 N.Y.2d 1002; People v Monroe, 216 A.D.2d 494). We decline to reach this issue in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction. Further, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we find that the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15).
The defendant's objections to the prosecutor's summation are, for the most part, unpreserved for appellate review. As to the preserved objections, the comments were proper responses to the defense counsel's summation or were not so prejudicial as to warrant reversal (see, People v Lamour, 203 A.D.2d 388).
Finally, the defendant's sentences are not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Bracken, J.P., Miller, Altman and Florio, JJ., concur.