The verdict was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. There is no basis upon which to disturb the jury's determinations concerning credibility and identification.
On the existing record, we conclude that defendant received meaningful representation (see, People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708, 713-714). Counsel's alleged deficiencies did not deprive defendant of a fair trial (see, People v. Hobot, 84 N.Y.2d 1021, 1024).
Each of defendant's contentions concerning the court's evidentiary rulings requires preservation (CPL 470.05), and we decline to review any of these unpreserved claims in the interest of justice.
Defendant's sentence of 5 years probation, imposed on April 11, 1990 was improperly revoked. There is no evidence in the record that defendant's probationary period was tolled by a timely declaration of delinquency (see, Penal Law § 65.15). Consequently, defendant's probationary term had expired prior to the violation of probation proceeding of July 10, 1995, thereby depriving the court of jurisdiction.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.