Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his contention that certain comments made by the prosecutor during summation were improper ( see CPL 470.05; People v Romero, 7 NY3d 911, 912; People v Rodari, 2 AD3d 756, 756-757; People v Scott, 267 AD2d 259, 260).
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.
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, 348), 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).
The sentence imposed was not excessive ( see CPL 470.15 [c]; [6] [b]; 470.20 [6]; People v Thompson, 60 NY2d 513, 519; People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).