Opinion
June 2, 1989
Appeal from the Livingston County Court, Cicoria, J.
Present — Callahan, J.P., Denman, Green, Balio and Davis, JJ.
Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: On appeal from a conviction of first degree perjury, none of the claims raised by defense counsel or by defendant, pro se, requires reversal. The verdict was amply supported by legally sufficient evidence (see, People v. Stanard, 42 N.Y.2d 74, cert denied 434 U.S. 986; cf., People v. Davis, 53 N.Y.2d 164) and, upon our review of the record, was not contrary to the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490). Since defendant was convicted upon legally sufficient evidence, his claim that the court erred in denying his motion to dismiss the indictment for legal insufficiency of the evidence before the Grand Jury is not reviewable on appeal (see, CPL 210.30; People v. Ganett, 68 A.D.2d 81, 84, affd 51 N.Y.2d 991). Defendant's claim that the Grand Jury proceeding was defective because the prosecutor failed to instruct the Grand Jury on corroboration (see, Penal Law § 210.50) lacks merit because the prosecutor is not required to give such instruction (see, CPL 190.30; People v Bomberry, 112 A.D.2d 18, 19, lv denied 66 N.Y.2d 614). The court's Sandoval ruling (see, People v. Sandoval, 34 N.Y.2d 371), was not an abuse of discretion. On this record we conclude that defendant received meaningful representation (see, People v Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147). Defendant's claims of prosecutorial misconduct were not preserved and we decline to reach them in the interest of justice.