Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that he was deprived of a fair trial by the manner in which the court marshaled the evidence in its jury charge is not preserved for appellate review since no objection was made to the charge on that ground (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Gray, 144 A.D.2d 483, 484; People v. McDonald, 144 A.D.2d 701, 702; People v. Patterson, 121 A.D.2d 406; People v. Earley, 118 A.D.2d 868; People v. McCright, 107 A.D.2d 766, 767), and we decline to review the issue in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt.
Also unpreserved for appellate review is the defendant's claim that the verdict sheet submitted to the jury was defective (see, People v. Barbella, 154 A.D.2d 687, cert. denied ___ US ___, 109 L Ed 2d 295; People v. Lugo, 150 A.D.2d 502; People v. Mathis, 150 A.D.2d 613; People v. Moore, 149 A.D.2d 739, 740; People v. Ross, 148 A.D.2d 643, 644), and we decline to review the claim in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction (see, People v. Lugo, supra; People v. Mathis, supra). Bracken, J.P., Kooper, Miller and Ritter, JJ., concur.