Opinion
November 18, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Rothwax, J.).
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, and giving it the benefit of every reasonable inference, we find the evidence sufficient to establish defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt of first degree manslaughter in the shooting death of his girlfriend's stepfather (People v Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620).
Moreover, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of that evidence (People v Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490).
Defendant's contention that the People failed to disprove codefendant's justification defense is without merit (see, People v Lee, 185 A.D.2d 824).
Defendant's challenge to the court's failure to charge the jury that his guilt had to be established beyond a moral certainty is not preserved for appellate review, and we decline to review in the interest of justice. Were we to review, we would find such a charge unwarranted since both direct and circumstantial evidence were presented to establish defendant's culpability (People v Cave, 191 A.D.2d 704). Further, contrary to defendant's contention, the jury was properly charged on accomplice liability (see, People v Jordan, 187 A.D.2d 731, lv denied 81 N.Y.2d 842). Similarly, defendant's contentions concerning the court's justification charge and jury verdict sheet are without merit (see, People v Davis, 58 N.Y.2d 1102, 1104; People v Sotomayer, 79 N.Y.2d 1029).
Finally, the court's imposition of a prison term, as opposed to Youthful Offender treatment (CPL art 720), was neither an abuse of discretion, nor excessive under the circumstances here present.
Concur — Carro, J.P., Rosenberger, Ellerin and Asch, JJ.