Opinion
December 5, 1988
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Aronin, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Viewing the evidence adduced at the trial in a light most favorable to the People (see, People v Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to support the conviction (see, Penal Law § 20.00, 155.00 Penal; People v Raphael, 134 A.D.2d 535, lv denied 70 N.Y.2d 1010, 71 N.Y.2d 901; cf., People v Burnice, 112 A.D.2d 642).
The defendant's claim that he was prejudiced by the introduction of hearsay testimony is largely unpreserved for our review (see, CPL 470.05; People v Guy, 121 A.D.2d 741, lv denied 68 N.Y.2d 813) and in any event is without merit (see, People v Brown, 70 N.Y.2d 513; People v Boyling, 84 A.D.2d 892).
The defendant's motion pursuant to CPL 440.20, contesting his adjudication as a second felony offender, is not properly before this court, since he failed to obtain permission to appeal its denial, as required by CPL 450.15 (see, People v Sweeter, 125 A.D.2d 841, lv denied 69 N.Y.2d 750; Bellacosa, Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons Laws of NY, Book 11A, CPL 450.15, at 545).
We have considered the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Lawrence, J.P., Eiber, Spatt and Balletta, JJ., concur.