Opinion
no. 2008-10000.
March 30, 2010.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Del Guidice, J.), rendered October 2, 2008, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Steven Banks, New York, N.Y. (Allen Fallek of counsel), for appellant.
Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Diane Eisner of counsel; Rose L. Amandola on the brief), for respondent.
Before: Rivera, J.P., Florio, Miller and Eng, JJ., concur.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to support his conviction of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree is unpreserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05; People v Hawkins, 11 NY3d 484; People v Finger, 95 NY2d 894, 895). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution ( see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt ( see People v Norwood, 191 AD2d 519; People v Griffith, 171 AD2d 678). Moreover, in fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence ( see CPL 470.15; People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342), we nevertheless accord great deference to the jury's opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor ( see People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 410, cert denied 542 US 946; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). Upon reviewing the record here, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence ( see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633).
The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.