People v Reyes

People v Reyes 2007 NY Slip Op 09250 [45 AD3d 785] November 20, 2007 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. As corrected through Wednesday, January 16, 2008

The People of the State of New York, Respondent,
v
Ricardo Reyes, Appellant.

—[*1] Ronna Gordon-Galchus, Bayside, N.Y., for appellant.

Richard A. Brown, District Attorney, Kew Gardens, N.Y. (John M. Castellano, Sharon Y. Brodt, and Joan J. Tarbutton of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lewis, J.), rendered May 9, 2005, convicting him of burglary in the second degree and criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's challenge to the legal sufficiency of the evidence is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Gray, 86 NY2d 10, 19-21 [1995]; People v Ayala, 15 AD3d 496 [2005]; People v Montalbo, 254 AD2d 504, 505 [1998]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), 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 (see CPL 470.15 [5]), we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633 [2006]).

The defendant's contention that the evidence of his guilt was wholly circumstantial and that the trial court erred in failing to give a special circumstantial evidence charge is unpreserved for appellate review, as the defendant did not request a circumstantial evidence charge or object to the charge as given (see CPL 470.05 [2]). Ritter, J.P., Goldstein, Skelos and Dillon, JJ., concur.