Opinion
June 3, 1999.
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Edward McLaughlin, J.).
Defendant failed to preserve his current claim that the court did not properly instruct the jury pursuant, to CPL 310.20 (2) regarding the purpose of adding the individual complainants' names on the verdict sheet listing two separate counts of assault in the first degree ( see, People v. Wheeler, 257 A.D.2d 673), and we decline to review this claim in the interest of justice. Were we to review it, we would find that the court's instructions to the jury effectively conveyed the import of the annotations.
A review of the trial evidence, including evidence of the firing of five to six shots, each of which constituted a separate act ( People v. Reyes, 239 A.D.2d 524, 525, lv denied 90 N.Y.2d 909), as well as the circumstances surrounding the shooting of the two individuals, establishes that there was a sufficient factual basis for the court to conclude that the victims were wounded by different bullets, thereby supporting the imposition of consecutive sentences in connection with the assault convictions ( see, People v. Di Lapo, 14 N.Y.2d 170, 174).
We have considered and rejected defendant's remaining claims, including those contained in his pro se supplemental brief.
Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Mazzarelli, Rubin, Andrias and Buckley, JJ.