Opinion
May 10, 1999
Appeal from the County Court, Rockland County (Meehan, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Evidence regarding the participation of the defendant and the People's witnesses in an operation to sell crack-cocaine was properly admitted to complete the narrative of the witnesses, and to aid the jury in its comprehension of the crimes ( see, People v. Till, 87 N.Y.2d 835; People v. Boyd, 230 A.D.2d 805; People v. Hardwick, 140 A.D.2d 624).
Although the court expanded slightly upon the jury charge contained in the Criminal Jury Instructions ( see, 1 CJI [N.Y.] 7.06), the entire charge, viewed as a whole, adequately conveyed to the jury the correct rule to apply in arriving at its verdict ( see, People v. Coleman, 70 N.Y.2d 817; People v. Canty, 60 N.Y.2d 830; People v. Dory, 59 N.Y.2d 121; People v. Owens, 202 A.D.2d 341; People v. Calderon, 182 A.D.2d 770).
The defendant's contention that the evidence was legally insufficient is unpreserved for appellate review ( see, People v. Robinson, 251 A.D.2d 354; People v. Tallarine, 223 A.D.2d 738). 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 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 ( see, CPL 470.15).
The defendant's remaining contentions, including the issue raised in his supplemental, pro se brief, are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.
Bracken, J. P., Thompson, Joy and Luciano, JJ., concur.