Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Braun, J.) rendered July 24, 2014, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
“Upon [a] defendant’s request, the Appellate Division must conduct a weight of the evidence review” and, thus, “a defendant will be given one appellate review of adverse factual findings” (P eople v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 348 [2007]). In fulfilling our responsibility to conduct an independent review of the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15 [5]; People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342 [2007]), we nevertheless accord great deference to the jury’s opportunity to view the witnesses, hear the testimony, and observe demeanor (see People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 410 [2004]; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). Upon reviewing the record here, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Gordon, 132 AD3d 904 [2015]; People v Perez, 120 AD3d 514, 515 [2014]; People v Washington, 108 AD3d 578, 580 [2013]; People v Vasquez, 94 AD3d 915, 916 [2012]).
Contrary to the defendant’s contention, he was not deprived of the effective assistance of counsel under the New York State *923 Constitution since, viewing defense counsel’s performance in totality, counsel provided meaningful representation (see People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708 [1998]; People v Williams, 136 AD3d 686 [2016]; People v Myers, 117 AD3d 755, 756 [2014]; People v McNeal, 111 AD3d 652, 653 [2013]; People v Campbell, 54 AD3d 959 [2008]; People v Hyatt, 2 AD3d 749, 750 [2003]). Further, the defendant was not deprived of the effective assistance of counsel under the United States Constitution (see Strickland v Washington, 466 US 668 [1984]).