Evidence at trial that defendant pointed his revolver at the officer's midsection from a distance was insufficient to prove attempted murder in the first degree, there being no proof that defendant had his finger on the trigger (compare, People v Moore, 165 A.D.2d 884, 885, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 989; People v Jenkins, 184 A.D.2d 731, lv denied 81 N.Y.2d 790; People v Orama, 150 A.D.2d 505, 506, lv denied 74 N.Y.2d 744), or otherwise came "`very near to the accomplishment of the intended crime'" (People v. Di Stefano, 38 N.Y.2d 640, 652). Nor was such evidence sufficient to prove reckless endangerment in the first degree (see, People v. Davis, 72 N.Y.2d 32, 36, citing People v Richardson, 97 A.D.2d 693, 694).
Defendant's challenges to the court's Sandoval ruling and charge on intent are unpreserved as a matter of law (People v Johnson, 169 A.D.2d 553, lv denied 78 N.Y.2d 968; People v Thomas, 50 N.Y.2d 467), and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. If we were to review, we would not disturb the balance of the judgment since, with respect to the Sandoval ruling, the court did not permit the People to inquire into the underlying facts of the conviction that was still pending on appeal (compare, People v. Chambers, 184 A.D.2d 716, 717-718), and, with respect to the charge, the error (see, People v Getch, 50 N.Y.2d 456) was harmless in view of the overwhelming proof of guilt on the remaining counts.
Concur — Wallach, J.P., Ross, Asch and Rubin, JJ.