Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's waiver of his right to counsel was unequivocal, voluntary, and intelligently made ( see People v. Smith, 92 NY2d 516). The trial court undertook a sufficiently searching inquiry of the defendant to be reasonably certain that the dangers and disadvantages of giving up the fundamental right to counsel were impressed upon him ( see People v. Smith, supra; cf. People v. Sawyer, 57 NY2d 12).
The defendant's contention that the evidence was not legally sufficient to establish his guilt of the crime of burglary in the third degree is unpreserved for appellate review ( see People v. Gray, 86 NY2d 10). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People ( see People v. Contes, 60 NY2d 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; People v. Torres, 10 AD3d 426).