Opinion
May 9, 1991
Appeal from the County Court of Tompkins County (Barrett, J.).
Defendant's conviction of grand larceny in the fourth degree arose out of events that occurred on December 21, 1989 at a department store in a shopping mall in Tompkins County. Testimony revealed that defendant served as the lookout for two codefendants, who allegedly engaged in a scheme involving removal of a filing cabinet from its box, placing 29 Nintendo games, two VCRs and two VCR movies, valued at $2,250, in the filing cabinet box and then purchasing the box at the filing cabinet price. Defendant contends on this appeal that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury verdict, that the charge to the jury on circumstantial evidence was erroneous and that the submission of a written copy of the charge to the jury was reversible error. We disagree.
Although the testimony of witnesses was inconsistent, it was not hopelessly contradictory (see, People v Politi, 161 A.D.2d 1045, 1047, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 863) and questions of credibility were properly left for resolution by the jury (see, People v Wells, 159 A.D.2d 799). Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see, supra), it was legally sufficient to support the verdict and not against the weight of the evidence (see, supra).
Because defendant did not object to the jury charge, any issue regarding the charge has not been preserved for appellate review (see, People v McChesney, 160 A.D.2d 1045). Moreover, the failure to give a circumstantial evidence charge was not error because there was direct evidence of defendant's guilt before the jury (see, People v Greiner, 156 A.D.2d 813, 816-817, lv denied 75 N.Y.2d 919). Finally, County Court did not err in submitting the entire charge in writing to the jury during its deliberations with the consent of defendant (see, People v Bess, 107 A.D.2d 844, 846).
Judgment affirmed. Mahoney, P.J., Mikoll, Levine, Crew III and Harvey, JJ., concur.