Opinion
January 20, 1987
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lodato, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People, there was sufficient evidence adduced to establish the direct or accessorial culpability of the defendant concerning the two murders (see, e.g., People v. Kennedy, 47 N.Y.2d 196, rearg dismissed 48 N.Y.2d 635). Furthermore, the conduct of the defendant with respect to the first murder was probative of his guilt of the second murder, under the circumstances of this case, as it was indicative of his motive to cause the death of the second victim (see, e.g., People v. Molineux, 168 N.Y. 264; People v. Bongarzone, 116 A.D.2d 164; People v. Pugh, 107 A.D.2d 521; cf. People v. Rose, 84 A.D.2d 645, affd 57 N.Y.2d 837, rearg denied 58 N.Y.2d 779). Consequently, the defendant's motion for a severance with respect to these two murder charges was properly denied (see, CPL 200.20 [b]; People v. Lane, 56 N.Y.2d 1; People v. Bongarzone, supra).
The defendant's further challenge to the court's alibi charge is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05) and we decline to exercise our discretionary power to review it in the interest of justice. In addition, the defendant's claim that the trial court erred in failing to give an Allen charge (see, Allen v. United States, 164 U.S. 492) when the jury announced a deadlock is both unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05) and without merit (see, People v. Page, 47 N.Y.2d 968, cert denied 444 U.S. 936).
We have examined the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Mollen, P.J., Lawrence, Eiber and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.