PEOPLE v. BARNES

Evidence adduced at trial indicated that four eyewitnesses acquainted with defendant saw him assume a "combat stance" and fire a handgun at the victim, who fell dead on a Bronx street. Defendant explained to at least one of those eyewitnesses that his intention was to "stick up" the victim for money he had withdrawn from the bank earlier in the day.

Defendant's claim that the trial court erred in failing to give a circumstantial evidence charge to the jury is meritless. Such a charge was not warranted in this case where evidence presented was both direct and circumstantial, and inferences to be drawn from the evidence establishing defendant's guilt were direct and compelling (see, e.g., People v. Devonish, 159 A.D.2d 320, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 733).

Likewise without merit is defendant's claim that the trial court abused its discretion in admitting into evidence the gun recovered from defendant approximately three weeks after the shooting herein, with appropriate limiting instructions (see, e.g., People v. Alvino, 71 N.Y.2d 233).

Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Kupferman, Smith and Rubin, JJ.