Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to support his convictions is unpreserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05; People v Finger, 95 NY2d 894; People v Cortes, 44 AD3d 1068, lv denied 10 NY3d 763). 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 establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt ( see People v Hepp, 40 AD3d 880). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence ( see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633, 644-645; People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 410, cert denied 542 US 946). Finally, the defendant's contention that the verdict was repugnant is unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, is without merit ( see People v Alfaro, 66 NY2d 985; People v Walker, 175 AD2d 146).