Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant did not preserve for appellate review his claims that the justification defense was not disproven beyond a reasonable doubt and that the complainant's testimony was incredible as a matter of law ( see, CPL 470.05; People v Torres, 219 A.D.2d 565; People v. Reeder, 209 A.D.2d 551). 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 disprove the defense of justification beyond a reasonable doubt. The evidence was also sufficient to support the jury's finding that the defendant intended to inflict, and that the complainant sustained, serious physical injury ( see, Penal Law § 10.00; People v. Wright, 221 A.D.2d 577; People v. Williams, 96 A.D.2d 740). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt is not against the weight of the evidence ( see, CPL 470.15).
The defendant failed to preserve for appellate review his objection to the court's instructions to the jury concerning the defense of justification, and, in any event, the contention is without merit.
Rosenblatt, J.P., Copertino, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.