Opinion
April 30, 1996
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Michael Obus, J.).
The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Defendant's participation in the robbery was clearly established by evidence of his conduct before, during and after the crime ( see, People v. Davis, 186 A.D.2d 437, lv denied 81 N.Y.2d 787). Evidence that, immediately prior to the crime, defendant and the codefendant engaged in conduct evincing a search for potential victims was properly admitted on the issue of intent and was a proper subject for comment by the prosecutor. The speedy trial motion was properly denied.
We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion. We have considered defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Rubin, Kupferman, Ross and Tom, JJ.