Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
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 (CPL 470.15).
The defendant's claim that the court erred in denying his request for a circumstantial evidence charge is without merit. A court is required to honor a defendant's request for a circumstantial evidence charge only where, unlike here, the evidence of his participation in criminal activity is "entirely * * * circumstantial" (People v. Barnes, 50 N.Y.2d 375, 380; see also, People v. Guidice, 83 N.Y.2d 630, 636; People v. Silva, 69 N.Y.2d 858, 859). In this case there was direct evidence of the defendant's guilt consisting of the testimony of several witnesses, as well as the defendant's own statements in which he made relevant admissions of guilt (see, People v. Rumble, 45 N.Y.2d 879, 880; see also, People v. Licitra, 47 N.Y.2d 554, 558-559).
Finally, because the defendant did not object in a timely manner, he failed to preserve for appellate review his claim that the court's charge on the theory of acting in concert was defective (CPL 470.05). Lawrence, J.P., Santucci, Friedmann and Florio, JJ., concur.