Defendant's challenge to the sufficiency of the proof regarding his knowledge of the weight of the controlled substance ( People v. Ryan, 82 N.Y.2d 497) is not preserved for our review. Defendant failed to object to the instruction given to the jury so as to afford the court the opportunity to cure any error ( People v. Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10, affg People v. Ivey, 204 A.D.2d 16), and we decline to reach the issue in the interest of justice (CPL 470.15).
Defendant also did not preserve by timely objection his claim of error in connection with the trial court's instruction regarding acting in concert (CPL 470.05), and we decline to reach the issue. Were we to review the question in the interest of justice, we would find that the court's instruction was in all respects proper. The jurors were told that, to find defendant guilty on an acting in concert theory, the People must prove that he knowingly acted with intent to further a specific criminal purpose and that mere presence at the scene is insufficient to support criminal complicity. The court's offer of hypothetical examples of the acting in concert theory cannot reasonably be viewed as directing a verdict, but afforded appropriate assistance in understanding the applicable legal principles ( People v. Fagan, 166 A.D.2d 290, 291, lv denied 77 N.Y.2d 838).
Finally, we perceive no abuse of discretion in the sentence imposed.
Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Rubin, Ross, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.