Appellate Advocates (Dina Zloczower of counsel), for appellant. Kings County District Attorney (Leonard Joblove, Amy Appelbaum and Andrew S. Ayala of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Michael A. Gary, J.), rendered May 1, 2018. The judgment convicted defendant, after a nonjury trial, of public lewdness, exposure of a person and attempted endangering the welfare of a child, and imposed sentence.

ORDERED that the judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Defendant was convicted, following a nonjury trial, of public lewdness (Penal Law § 245.00 [a]), exposure of a person (Penal Law § 245.01), and attempted endangering the welfare of a child (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 260.10 [1]).

Defendant's contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to establish his guilt of attempted endangering the welfare of a child beyond a reasonable doubt is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Hawkins, 11 NY3d 484, 491-492 [2008]). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People (see People v Contes, 60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish defendant's guilt, beyond a reasonable doubt, of attempted endangering the welfare of a child.

Moreover, 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 accord great deference to the factfinder's opportunity to view the witnesses, hear their testimony, and observe [*2]their demeanor (see People v Lane, 7 NY3d 888, 890 [2006]; People v Mateo, 2 NY3d 383, 409 [2004]; People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495 [1987]). Upon a review of the record, we are satisfied that the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see People v Romero, 7 NY3d 633 [2006]).

Accordingly, the judgment of conviction is affirmed.

ALIOTTA, P.J., WESTON and ELLIOT, JJ., concur.