Opinion
December 22, 1986
Appeal from the County Court, Nassau County (Thorp, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the trial court erred by failing to submit the issue of geographical jurisdiction to the jury is unpreserved for appellate review since the defendant never requested that such a charge be given (see, People v Pilgrim, 52 N.Y.2d 730; People v. Moore, 46 N.Y.2d 1). It cannot be said as a matter of law that jurisdiction was lacking here (see, CPL 20.40, 20.60 Crim. Proc.; People v. Botta, 100 A.D.2d 311).
Also unpreserved are the defendant's arguments concerning the court's charge on circumstantial evidence (see, People v Nuccie, 57 N.Y.2d 818). In any event, the charge given was, in all respects, proper (see, People v. Ford, 66 N.Y.2d 428).
The evidence adduced at the trial was sufficient to prove the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v Foster, 64 N.Y.2d 1144, cert denied ___ US ___, 106 S Ct 166).
We have considered the defendant's remaining arguments and have found them to be either unpreserved or without merit (see also, People v. Maucieri, 125 A.D.2d 600 [decided herewith]). Weinstein, J.P., Rubin, Kooper and Sullivan, JJ., concur.