The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. Defendant was properly convicted of robbery in the first degree under Penal Law § 160.15 (2) and criminal possession of a weapon in the second degree under Penal Law § 265.03 (2). The only reasonable inference that could be drawn from the chain of evidence in this fast-paced incident was that the loaded, operable pistol recovered by the police immediately after the crime was the same weapon that was used by one of the robbers ( see e.g. People v Danzler, 288 AD2d 5, lv denied 97 NY2d 753).