Opinion
April 3, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vaughan, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the Supreme Court's charge regarding the People's burden of proving the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt did not deprive him of a fair trial. A reading of the entire charge indicates that the concept of reasonable doubt was properly explained to the jury. Thus, the jury was apprised of the correct standard to be applied in arriving at its verdict (see, People v Adams, 69 N.Y.2d 805; People v Canty, 60 N.Y.2d 830).
We have examined the defendant's remaining contention and find that it lacks merit (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Sullivan, J.P., Copertino, Pizzuto and Krausman, JJ., concur.