The jury could have reasonably concluded from the evidence that defendant had an ongoing business relationship with an unknown heroin seller behind the dumpster, or that the heroin sold to the undercover officer was from defendant's own stash. Agency "is generally a factual question[;] * * * [t]here is no legal formula for determining the defendant's intent at the time of the drug transfer" ( People v Lam Lek Chong, 45 N.Y.2d 64, 74-75, cert denied 439 U.S. 935). The jury's verdict was not against the weight of the evidence ( see, People v Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495). We have considered defendant's remaining contentions and find them unpreserved by specific objection, or without merit.
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Ross and Tom, JJ.