The defendant's contention that the Supreme Court erred in declining to instruct the jury on temporary and lawful possession of a weapon is unpreserved for appellate review, as he failed to request such a charge at trial ( see People v. Silas, 308 A.D.2d 465, 764 N.Y.S.2d 193;People v. Kouvaras, 197 A.D.2d 638, 602 N.Y.S.2d 679;see also People v. Caldarola, 45 A.D.3d 600, 845 N.Y.S.2d 117). In any event, this contention is without merit, as there was no reasonable view of the evidencethat the defendant had a legal excuse for possessing the weapon, and that the weapon had not been used in a dangerous manner ( see People v. Hayes, 51 A.D.3d 688, 858 N.Y.S.2d 242;People v. Medina, 237 A.D.2d 382, 655 N.Y.S.2d 430;People v. Kouvaras, 197 A.D.2d at 639, 602 N.Y.S.2d 679). The defendant's contention that the Supreme Court erred in denying his request to instruct the jury on voluntary possession is without merit.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed. The trial court correctly declined to provide the jury with a charge regarding the temporary, innocent, and lawful possession of a weapon, as there was no reasonable view of the evidence that the defendant had a legal excuse for possessing the weapon and that the weapon had not been used in a dangerous manner ( see People v Banks, 76 NY2d 799, 801; People v Snyder, 73 NY2d 900, 902; People v Williams, 50 NY2d 1043, 1044-1045; People v Caldarola, 45 AD3d 600, 600-601; People v Medina, 237 AD2d 382, 382-383). The defendant was not denied the effective assistance of counsel because trial counsel withdrew the defense request for a justification charge.

In any event, viewing the testimony in the light most favorable to the defendant ( see People v Steele, 26 NY2d 526, 529), there was no reasonable view of the evidence upon which the jury could have found that the defendant's possession was innocent. Thus, the charge was not warranted ( see People v Banks, 76 NY2d 799, 800; People v Williams, 50 NY2d 1043, 1044-1045; People vJohnson, 30 AD3d 439; People v Cruz, 13 AD3d 390; People v Silas, 308 AD2d 465, 466; People v Way, 304 AD2d 844, 844-845; People v Hawkins, 258 AD2d 472; People v Medina, 237 AD2d 382, 382-383). As relevant here, a person is guilty of the crime of tampering with physical evidence when: "Believing that certain physical evidence is about to be produced or used in an official proceeding or a prospective official proceeding, and intending to prevent such production or use, he suppresses it by any act of concealment, alteration or destruction, or by employing force, intimidation or deception against any person."

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed. Under the circumstances of this case, the defendant was not entitled to a charge of temporary and lawful possession of a weapon (see, People v. Medina, 237 A.D.2d 382). The defendant's sentence was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).