Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to support the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15 [5]).
We find that, upon reviewing the entire charge, the court properly instructed the jury on reasonable doubt (see, People v Canty, 60 NY2d 830; People v Yanik, 43 NY2d 97, on remand 63 AD2d 574; People v Blackshear, 112 AD2d 1044, lv denied 66 NY2d 917; People v Navarro, 104 AD2d 958; People v Cruz, 97 AD2d 518).
We also find the statements made by the prosecutor which the defendant contends constituted prosecutorial misconduct were either proper responses to the defense summation (see, People v Street, 124 AD2d 841, lv denied 69 NY2d 834; People v Freeman, 123 AD2d 784, lv denied 69 NY2d 711), properly
We have reviewed the defendant’s remaining contentions and find that they are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit (see, People v Santana, 125 AD2d 427, lv denied 70 NY2d 960; People v Torres, 118 AD2d 821, lv denied 68 NY2d 672). Mollen, P. J., Thompson, Rubin and Spatt, JJ., concur.