Ordered that the judgment, as amended, is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that his convictions are not supported by legally sufficient evidence is unpreserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution ( see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 349), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, in fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence ( see CPL 470.15; People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342), we nevertheless accord great deference to the jury's opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor ( see People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 410, cert denied 542 US 946; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). Upon reviewing the record here, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence ( see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633, 643).
The defendant's contention that the hearsay testimony of the subject children's mother before the grand jury impaired the integrity of that proceeding is without merit ( see People v Huston, 88 NY2d 400, 409; People v Avant, 33 NY2d 265, 271), and is "not reviewable on appeal from a judgment of conviction that was based on legally sufficient . . . evidence" ( People v Nealy, 32 AD3d 400, 402; see CPL 210.30).
The defendant's contention that the hearsay testimony of the subject children's mother at trial violated his right to a fair trial is not preserved for appellate review because defense counsel failed to object or request a curative instruction ( see CPL 470.05), and also waived the contention by his cross-examination of the children's mother ( see People v Bryan, 50 AD3d 1049, 1050).
The defendant's contention that he was deprived of the effective assistance of trial counsel is without merit ( see People v Baldi 54 NY2d 137, 146-147).
The sentence imposed was not excessive ( see People v Thompson, 60 NY2d 513, 519; People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).