Opinion
March 29, 1999
Appeal from the judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Eng, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the trial court properly considered the unrefuted court calendar notations and the People's affirmation in deciding that the People met their burden of proof in denying the defendant's motion pursuant to CPL 30.30 ( see, People v. Russo, 99 A.D.2d 498; see also, People v. Carter, 115 A.D.2d 551, 552).
Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the People ( see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. 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 defendant's sentence was neither harsh nor excessive ( see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.
O'Brien, J. P., Friedmann, Florio and McGinity, JJ., concur.