Opinion
Argued June 21, 1999
October 4, 1999
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Starkey, J.).
ORDERED that the judgment is modified, as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice, by deleting the provision thereof providing that the terms of imprisonment imposed shall run consecutively to each other and substituting therefor a provision providing that the terms of imprisonment shall run concurrently with each other; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed.
Initially, it is noted that the defendant's contention that he was not identified as the shooter beyond a reasonable doubt was not preserved for appellate review ( see, CPL 470.05; People v. Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10). 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 the evidence was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt ( People v. Alexander, 176 A.D.2d 947; People v. Harvey, 175 A.D.2d 138). 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 excessive to the extent indicated herein.
The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.
JOY, J.P., KRAUSMAN, H. MILLER, and FEUERSTEIN, JJ., concur.