Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Criminal Court, Queens County (W. Erlbaum, J.), rendered September 19, 2002, convicting him, after a jury trial, of two counts of endangering the welfare of a child (Penal Law § 260.10 [1]) and two counts of harassment in the second degree (Penal Law § 240.26 [1]), and imposing sentence.

Judgment of conviction unanimously affirmed.

It is well settled that in order for a question of law to be reviewed on appeal, the lower court must have been provided with an opportunity to correct any error in the proceedings at a time when the issue can be dealt with most effectively (see People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 665 [1988]). It is uncontroverted that defendant failed to preserve his objection to the jury charge for appellate review. However, if this issue were considered in the interest of justice, a review of the pertinent parts of the charge indicates that defendant's contention is without merit since the trial court, when it charged the jury on endangering the welfare of a child and harassment in the second degree charges, read the relevant parts of the accusatory instrument to the jury, informed the jury of the elements of each charge, provided the jury with defendant's specific conduct as to each charge, and instructed the jury that the People had to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, each and every element of said charges.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that the evidence adduced at trial was legally sufficient to establish defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Upon the exercise [*2]
of our factual review power, we further find that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see CPL 470.15 [5]). Defendant's remaining contentions lack merit.
Decision Date: June 25, 2004