Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the prosecution failed to disprove his justification defense by legally sufficient evidence is unpreserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05; People v Hawkins, 11 NY3d 484; People v Smiley, 303 AD2d 425; People v Nery, 243 AD2d 585; People v Reeder, 209 AD2d 551). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution ( see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621), we find that it was legally sufficient to disprove the defendant's justification defense beyond a reasonable doubt ( see Penal Law § 35.15; People v Dominguez, 226 AD2d 391; People v Reeder, 209 AD2d 551; People v Torres, 182 AD2d 788).
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).