Opinion
Submitted March 31, 2000.
May 8, 2000.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Ruchelsman, J.), rendered December 16, 1998, convicting him of criminal possession of marihuana in the second degree, criminal possession of marihuana in the fourth degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Lynn W. L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Tonya Plank of counsel), for appellant.
Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove, Jodi L. Mandel, and Diana Villanueva of counsel), for respondent.
Before: FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., LEO F. McGINITY, DANIEL F. LUCIANO, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, JJ.
DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that since he was charged with criminal possession, rather than criminal sale, of marihuana, the court improperly allowed the People to contend that he was engaged in the business of selling marihuana, and to proffer evidence to that effect (see, People v. Morales, 133 A.D.2d 90; People v. Brown, 71 A.D.2d 918). However, with respect to the majority of the challenged remarks, testimony, and evidence, the defendant either failed to object, made only a general objection, objected on different grounds, or failed to request curative instructions. Therefore, his contentions concerning this matter are unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Nuccie, 57 N.Y.2d 818; People v. West, 56 N.Y.2d 662; People v. Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245). In any event, any error was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt (see, People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230; see, e.g., People v. Portilla, 190 A.D.2d 827).
The defendant's sentence was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
SANTUCCI, J.P., McGINITY, LUCIANO and SCHMIDT, JJ., concur.