Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the evidence was legally insufficient is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; 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).
Furthermore, it was not error for the court to refuse to charge the jury on the defense of justification, since no reasonable view of the evidence supported that defense (see, People v Butts, 72 N.Y.2d 746; People v Watts, 57 N.Y.2d 299; People v Bistonath, 216 A.D.2d 478).
The defendant's sentence was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Joy, J.P., Hart, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.