Majority
—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant fired two shots from a pump-action rifle at two police officers who were investigating a report of a man with a gun. Viewing the evidence adduced at the trial in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 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 [5]).
We find that the court’s charge on identification was sufficient (see, People v Whalen, 59 NY2d 273 , 279; People v James, 170 AD2d 694 ; People v Bishop, 144 AD2d 476 ; People v Grant, 132 AD2d 619 ). The court also properly denied the defendant’s request for a jury charge concerning justification (see, People v Goetz, 68 NY2d 96 ; People v Padgett, 60 NY2d 142 ; People v Jeffries, 166 AD2d 665 ).
The court permissibly sentenced the defendant to consecutive terms of imprisonment because the two shots he fired were not a "single act” (Penal Law § 70.25 [2]; see, People v Day, 73 NY2d 208 ; People v Braithwaite, 63 NY2d 839 ; People v Gilliam, 112 AD2d 475 ).
We have considered the defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Thompson, J. P., Santucci, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- People v. Contes 60 NY2d 620 p. 609
- People v. Whalen 59 NY2d 273 at 279 p. 609
- People v. James 170 AD2d 694 p. 609
- People v. Bishop 144 AD2d 476 p. 609
- People v. Grant 132 AD2d 619 p. 609
- People v. Goetz 68 NY2d 96 p. 609
- People v. Padgett 60 NY2d 142 p. 609
- People v. Jeffries 166 AD2d 665 p. 609
- People v. Day 73 NY2d 208 p. 609
- People v. Brathwaite 63 NY2d 839 p. 609
- People v. Gilliam 112 AD2d 475 p. 609