Opinion
May 20, 1996
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Barasch, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish that he sold cocaine to an undercover police officer is unpreserved for appellate review ( see, CPL 470.05; People v. Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245; People v Williams, 187 A.D.2d 547). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People ( 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 ( see, People v Harvey, 175 A.D.2d 138). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence ( see, CPL 470.15). The undercover officer's detailed testimony regarding the drug sale, including his identification of the defendant as the individual who sold him the drugs, and the police chemist's testimony were sufficient to sustain the judgment of conviction ( see, People v Arroyo, 54 N.Y.2d 567, 578, citing People v. Daniels, 37 N.Y.2d 624, 628). Balletta, J.P., Rosenblatt, Thompson and Copertino, JJ., concur.