Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the testimony of the confidential informant was incredible as a matter of law is unpreserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05) and, in any event, is without merit. The testimony was not incredible as a matter of law ( see People v Pagan, 291 AD2d 509, 510; People v McDaniel, 233 AD2d 343, 343-344) and was corroborated by other evidence ( see People v Bibbs, 31 AD3d 655, 656).
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. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power ( see CPL 470.15), we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence ( see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633).
The defendant received the effective assistance of counsel ( see People v Caban, 5 NY3d 143, 152; People v Stultz, 2 NY3d 277, 287).
The sentence imposed was not excessive ( see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).