Opinion
December 7, 1987
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (McNab, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Since the defendant neither objected to the trial court's circumstantial evidence charge nor requested any further instruction with respect to the evaluation of circumstantial evidence, his claim that the charge was erroneous has not been preserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v Hoke, 62 N.Y.2d 1022; People v Shaw, 128 A.D.2d 817, lv denied 70 N.Y.2d 656). In any event, the circumstantial evidence charge delivered by the court, read as a whole, adequately stated the principles of law necessary to permit the jury to properly evaluate the evidence (see, People v Band, 125 A.D.2d 683).
Furthermore, the defendant's claim that the circumstantial evidence in the record was insufficient to convict him as a matter of law is likewise without merit. It is clear from the record that the hypothesis of guilt flowed naturally from the facts proven and excluded to a moral certainty every conclusion other than guilt (see, People v Kennedy, 47 N.Y.2d 196, rearg dismissed 48 N.Y.2d 656). When viewed in the light most favorable to the People, the evidence is legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt of the crime charged (see, People v Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the evidence established the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (CPL 470.15).
We have examined the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be either unpreserved or without merit. Mangano, J.P., Thompson, Lawrence and Eiber, JJ., concur.