Opinion
March 27, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Gerges, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's claim that the evidence was legally insufficient to support his conviction for criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree is not preserved for appellate review (see, People v. Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245). In any event, viewing the evidence adduced at the trial in the 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. The defendant's brandishing of a gun demonstrated that during the time that he possessed it prior to its lawful use, he possessed the gun with a criminal intent (see, People v. Pons, 68 N.Y.2d 264, 266).
The defendant's claim of error regarding the court's instruction is unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, without merit.
In light of the seriousness of the defendant's crimes, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Balletta, J.P., Thompson, Lawrence and Goldstein, JJ., concur.