Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the trial court's Allen charge ( see Allen v United States, 164 US 492) was improper is unpreserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05; People v Franklin, 54 AD3d 964). In any event, contrary to the defendant's contention, the charge, on the whole, was balanced and neutral ( see People v McKenzie, 48 AD3d 594, 595; People v Kendrick, 256 AD2d 420, 421). The court's instructions were directed at the jurors in general, and "did not urge that a dissenting juror abandon his or her own conviction, attempt to coerce or compel the jury to reach a particular verdict, or shame the jury into reaching a verdict" ( People v McKenzie, 48 AD3d at 595; see People v Gonzales, 281 AD2d 432; People v Perdomo, 204 AD2d 358).
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution ( see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.