Opinion
February 5, 1996
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Blumenfeld, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (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 [5]).
Contrary to the defendant's contention that his trial attorney did not provide meaningful representation, counsel's strategic choices as to the theory of defense, the presentation of defense witnesses, and the scope of cross-examination of the People's witnesses were reasonable given the evidence, the law, and the circumstances of the case (see, People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137; see also, People v. Braithwaite, 139 A.D.2d 749).
Under the circumstances of this case, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
The defendant's remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245). Sullivan, J.P., Pizzuto, Goldstein and Florio, JJ., concur.