Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the jury's verdict on two counts of the indictment was inconsistent or repugnant is not preserved for appellate review as there was neither an objection to the manner of submission of this case to the jury nor was any objection registered before the jury was discharged (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Alfaro, 66 N.Y.2d 985; People v. Satloff, 56 N.Y.2d 745, rearg denied 57 N.Y.2d 674; People v. Burford, 105 A.D.2d 752). Under the circumstances of this case, we decline to exercise our interest of justice jurisdiction to review this issue.
The evidence adduced at the trial was sufficient as a matter of law to sustain the defendant's convictions (see, People v Malizia, 62 N.Y.2d 755, cert denied 469 U.S. 932). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the evidence established the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Mangano, J.P., Eiber, Sullivan and Harwood, JJ., concur.