Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying the defendant's motion for a hearing based on alleged juror misconduct. The defendant's oral application based on an anonymous letter was insufficient to meet the procedural requirements that the motion be in writing based on sworn allegations ( see, CPL 330.40 [a], [e] [ii]; People v. Friedgood, 58 N.Y.2d 467; People v. Laguer, 195 A.D.2d 483). In addition, the finality of the jury verdict will not be disturbed simply because a juror had a change of heart ( see, People v. Bellamy, 158 A.D.2d 525).
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).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.
Bracken, J. P., O'Brien, Sullivan and Santucci, JJ., concur.