Opinion
December 4, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (O'Dwyer, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence is not preserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05). In any event, 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 was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15).
We further find that the admission of the testimony from the complainant that he worked in the drug business with the defendant does not warrant reversal because the evidence was inextricably interwoven with admissible evidence and the crime charged (see, People v Mangarella, 190 A.D.2d 757; People v Davis, 169 A.D.2d 774).
Finally, the sentence was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Thompson, J.P., Ritter, Joy and Florio, JJ., concur.