Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant failed to preserve for our review his contentions that the evidence of intent to commit a crime is legally insufficient to support his conviction of burglary in the second degree ( see, People v. Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10, 19; People v. Bynum, 70 N.Y.2d 858, 859), that the jury instruction regarding prior inconsistent statements was inadequate ( see, People v. Hicks, 205 A.D.2d 478, 479, lv denied 84 N.Y.2d 868) and that County Court failed to marshal the evidence in an even-handed manner ( see, People v. Filardi, 203 A.D.2d 301; People v. Easterling, 166 A.D.2d 713). We decline to exercise our power to review those contentions as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice ( see, CPL 470.15 [a]). The verdict is not against the weight of the evidence ( see, People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495), and the sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe.