Opinion
December 4, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Tomei, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his claim that the evidence adduced at trial was legally insufficient to support his conviction of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree under count four of the indictment (involving constructive possession of seven glassine envelopes of heroin) (see, CPL 470.05; People v Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245, 250), and we decline to reach this issue in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.
Similarly, the defendant's contention that he was denied his rights to confrontation and cross-examination is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245, 250, supra), and we also decline to reach this issue in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction. Bracken, J.P., Sullivan, Rosenblatt and Hart, JJ., concur.