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 (see, CPL 470.15).
The defendant contends that it was error for the court to allow a detective to testify as to the description given to him by the victim. That issue is unpreserved for appellate review. In any event, we find any error in that regard to be harmless (see, People v Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230; People v Mobley, 56 N.Y.2d 584; People v Johnson, 57 N.Y.2d 969).
The defendant's contention that the verdict sheet submitted to the jury was improper (see, People v Nimmons, 72 N.Y.2d 830) is not preserved for appellate review, since he failed to object to its submission (see, CPL 470.05; People v Freeman, 162 A.D.2d 704; People v McClain, 168 A.D.2d 514). We decline to review the issue in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction (see, People v McClain, supra; People v Comer, 163 A.D.2d 485).
We have examined the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Thompson, J.P., Bracken, Harwood and Copertino, JJ., concur.