Opinion
June 16, 1997
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Gary, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the evidence was not legally sufficient to support his conviction for attempted aggravated assault upon a police officer is not preserved for appellate review ( see, People v. Balls, 69 N.Y.2d 641; People v. Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245, 250). 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 establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Additionally, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence ( see, CPL 470.15).
The defendant also failed to preserve his contention that the forensic expert's testimony should not have been admitted because it was too uncertain ( see, CPL 470.05; People v. Balls, supra, at 642). In any event, any error in allowing the testimony in question was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt ( see, People v Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230).
Miller, J.P., Copertino, Sullivan and Altman, JJ., concur.