Opinion
October 27, 1997
Appeal from Supreme Court, Queens County (Pitaro, J.)
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the evidence adduced at trial was legally insufficient to prove that he had the intent to commit the crime of attempted robbery was unpreserved for appellate review because the defendant's motion for a trial order of dismissal was not sufficiently specific ( see, People v. Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10, 20-21; People v. Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245, 250). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution ( see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 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 (CPL 470.15).
Thompson, J.P., Sullivan, Joy and Florio, JJ., concur.