Opinion
May 16, 1994
Appeal from the County Court, Nassau County (Orenstein, J.).
Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.
With respect to the judgment of conviction under Indictment No. 91-78489, after a jury trial, the defendant's contention that the language the court used in delivering its instruction to the jury on "reasonable doubt", in effect, shifted the burden of proof from the prosecution to the defense, is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Thomas, 50 N.Y.2d 467, 472) and, in any event, without merit (see, People v. Jones, 27 N.Y.2d 222, 227; see also, People v Malloy, 55 N.Y.2d 296, cert denied 459 U.S. 847; People v Acosta, 182 A.D.2d 768; cf., People v. Towndrow, 187 A.D.2d 194, 195).
Contrary to the defendant's contention, viewing counsel's conduct in its entirety, the defendant was not deprived of the effective assistance of counsel (see, People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137; People v. Finch, 199 A.D.2d 278; People v. Johnson, 184 A.D.2d 732).
The defendant's contention with respect to the propriety of the sentence imposed is without merit (see, People v. Delgado, 80 N.Y.2d 780; People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
The defendant's remaining contentions with respect to his judgment of conviction under Indictment No. 91-78489 are either unpreserved for appellate review or harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of his guilt.
In view of our determination with respect to the defendant's judgment of conviction under Indictment No. 91-78489, after a jury trial, there is no basis for vacatur of his pleas under Indictment No. 91-79110 and Indictment No. 91-79321 (cf., People v. Clark, 45 N.Y.2d 432). Bracken, J.P., Sullivan, O'Brien and Joy, JJ., concur.