Opinion
August 7, 1989
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Miller, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
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. 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 (CPL 470.15).
The defendant's claim that the verdict was repugnant has not been preserved for appellate review due to defense counsel's rejection of the prosecutor's challenge to the verdict at the close of the trial (see, People v. Stevens, 109 A.D.2d 856). Rather than objecting to the verdict, defense counsel strenuously argued in support of it. In any event, the jury's conclusion that the defendant was not as culpable as his codefendant finds support in the record. The verdict was not inherently inconsistent when viewed in light of the elements of each crime as charged to the jury (People v. Goodfriend, 64 N.Y.2d 695; People v. Tucker, 55 N.Y.2d 1, rearg denied 55 N.Y.2d 1039).
We have considered the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, without merit. Bracken, J.P., Kunzeman, Sullivan and Balletta, JJ., concur.