Opinion
July 20, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Pincus, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that certain instructions and supplemental instructions given by the trial court to the jury deprived him of a fair trial because, inter alia, the court distorted the standard of reasonable doubt, and failed to tell the jury that the verdict must be the verdict of each individual juror. We disagree.
No objection was taken with regard to the jury instructions, or supplemental instructions. Thus, this issue is unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v. Duncan, 46 N.Y.2d 74; People v Chin, 67 N.Y.2d 22; CPL 470.05). In any event, we find that the court's instructions were neutral, noncoercive, and proper (see generally, People v. Pagan, 45 N.Y.2d 725; People v. Bowen, 134 A.D.2d 356; People v. Hardy, 109 A.D.2d 802).
Furthermore, 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). Thompson, J.P., Eiber, Pizzuto and Santucci, JJ., concur.