DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the evidence was insufficient to establish his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05[2]; People v. Udzinski, 146 A.D.2d 245 ). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 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, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15[5]).
There is no merit to the defendant's contention that the court erred in denying his request for a missing witness charge. The defendant failed to establish that the alleged missing witness, if produced at trial, would have offered anything other than cumulative testimony (see, People v. Macana, 84 N.Y.2d 173, 177 ;People v. Gonzalez, 68 N.Y.2d 424 ; People v. Pierre, 149 A.D.2d 740 ). The sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80 ).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.