Opinion
May 22, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Grajales, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
We agree with the hearing court that the police had probable cause to arrest the defendant since the facts and circumstances, viewed together, would lead a reasonable person to believe that the defendant had committed the crimes for which he was arrested (see, People v Dawkins, 163 A.D.2d 322, 324).
The defendant's contention that the People failed to disprove the defense of justification beyond a reasonable doubt is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v Salmons, 210 A.D.2d 512; People v Barnett, 197 A.D.2d 697; People v Huggins, 195 A.D.2d 608). 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 disprove the defense of justification beyond a reasonable doubt (see, Penal Law § 35.15). 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 sentences imposed for manslaughter in the first degree and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree were not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Rosenblatt, J.P., Ritter, Pizzuto and Krausman, JJ., concur.