Opinion
Argued September 21, 1999
October 28, 1999
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Gary, J.).
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
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[5]).
To the extent that the defendant's motion pursuant to CPL 330.30 to set aside the verdict was based on the ground of ineffective assistance of counsel and relied on alleged deficiencies in his counsel's performance which were dehors the record, those claims are not properly before this court on the appeal from the final judgment of conviction (see, People v. Grossfeld, 216 A.D.2d 319, 320 ; People v. Nieves, 144 A.D.2d 588, 589 ). With respect to those aspects of the trial counsel's performance which are part of the record and, thus, properly before this court, we conclude that the defendant was not deprived of the effective assistance of counsel (see, People v. Nieves, supra).
O'BRIEN, J.P., SULLIVAN, ALTMAN, and KRAUSMAN, JJ., concur.