Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Viewing the evidence adduced at the trial that the defendant possessed a loaded firearm not in his home or business in the light most favorable to the People (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to support his conviction of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (Penal Law § 265.02).
The trial court's refusal to give the jury a missing witness charge with regard to two uncalled witnesses was not error in the absence of any indication that their testimony would have been material and noncumulative (cf., People v. Gonzalez, 68 N.Y.2d 424). Thompson, J.P., Weinstein, Rubin and Harwood, JJ., concur.