Opinion
May 15, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Starkey, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's challenges to the legal sufficiency of the evidence are unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v Bynum, 70 N.Y.2d 858; People v Okehoffurum, 201 A.D.2d 508; cf., People v Hill, 85 N.Y.2d 252). 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 beyond a reasonable doubt both the defendant's identity and that he knew the weight of the drugs (see, People v Ryan, 82 N.Y.2d 497, 505; People v Dillon, 207 A.D.2d 793; People v Okehoffurum, supra). Moreover, 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). Sullivan, J.P., Copertino, Goldstein and Florio, JJ., concur.