Opinion
October 10, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Feldman, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review the issue of whether the People proved her intent to commit a burglary beyond a reasonable doubt (see, CPL 470.05). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (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).
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the court properly permitted testimony concerning prior criminal acts committed by the defendant as it helped establish the element of intent for burglary in the second degree (see, People v. Figueroa, 195 A.D.2d 477; People v. Vargas, 215 A.D.2d 415). In addition, the probative value of the evidence outweighed its potential for prejudice to the defendant (see, People v. Alvino, 71 N.Y.2d 233).
The defendant's remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, without merit. Miller, J.P., Altman, Goldstein and Florio, JJ., concur.