Opinion
November 18, 1991
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lagana, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant argues that the court should have sua sponte charged the jury on circumstantial evidence regarding the intentional murder count, since there was no direct evidence in support of that charge. Because the defendant failed to request such a charge and did not object to the charge as given on this ground, this claim is unpreserved for appellate review as a matter of law (see, People v. Thomas, 50 N.Y.2d 467; People v Pertha, 169 A.D.2d 844). We decline to exercise our interest of justice jurisdiction to review this claim in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt.
The sentence imposed was not harsh or excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Kunzeman, J.P., Sullivan, Lawrence and Balletta, JJ., concur.