Opinion
May 4, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Golia, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's arguments concerning the legal sufficiency of the evidence are unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05). 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 both to disprove the defense of justification and to establish the defendant's intent to cause serious physical injury, beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v. Candelaria, 206 A.D.2d 385; People v. Rochester, 168 A.D.2d 519). 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).
Under the circumstances of this case, the defendant was not denied the effective assistance of counsel due to his counsel's failure to make a statement on his behalf at sentencing (see, People v. Williams, 97 A.D.2d 599, 600). The sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 82).
Rosenblatt, J.P., Ritter, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.