Opinion
November 6, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Firetog, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant has failed to preserve for appellate review the issue of the legal sufficiency of the evidence (see, CPL 470.05; People v Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245). 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 beyond a reasonable doubt the defendant's intent to cause "serious physical injury" to the complainant with a loaded firearm (Penal Law § 120.10; see, Penal Law § 265.03; People v Bracey, 41 N.Y.2d 296; People v Garland, 177 A.D.2d 410). 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 sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
The defendant's remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review, and, in any event, without merit. Joy, J.P., Hart, Goldstein and Florio, JJ., concur.