Majority
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant’s contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to support his convictions is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), 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]). The defendant conceded that while holding a shotgun to the victim he told him to “empty his pockets.” Moreover, two eyewitnesses testified that a codefendant placed his hand in the deceased’s pocket. This was sufficient evidence from which the jury could conclude that the defendant acted with larcenous intent (see People v Bracey, 41 NY2d 296 , 300-301 [1977]).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]).
The contentions raised in the defendant’s supplemental pro se brief either are unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Luciano, J.P., Mastro, Spolzino and Skelos, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- People v. Contes 60 NY2d 620 p. 461
- People v. Suitte 90 AD2d 80 p. 461