PEOPLE v. BROWN (2000)

 We reject defendant's contention that County Court's statements during a pretrial plea negotiation proceeding regarding a possible sentence indicated bias on the part of the court.   In the absence of a violation of Judiciary Law § 14 or a showing by defendant that the court's alleged bias affected the result of the trial, the determination of defendant's motion for recusal was a matter left to the court's conscience, and the court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion (see, People v. Smith, 63 N.Y.2d 41, 68, 479 N.Y.S.2d 706, 468 N.E.2d 879, cert. denied 469 U.S. 1227, 105 S.Ct. 1226, 84 L.Ed.2d 364, reh. denied 471 U.S. 1049, 105 S.Ct. 2042, 85 L.Ed.2d 340;  People v. Martuzas, 224 A.D.2d 928, 929, 637 N.Y.S.2d 569, lv. denied 88 N.Y.2d 881, 645 N.Y.S.2d 456, 668 N.E.2d 427).

 The contentions of defendant concerning the alleged legal insufficiency of the proof, both in his counsel's brief and his pro se supplemental brief, have not been preserved for our review because defendant failed to raise those contentions when he moved to dismiss the indictment (see, People v. Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10, 19, 629 N.Y.S.2d 173, 652 N.E.2d 919;  People v. Gallow, 171 A.D.2d 1061, 569 N.Y.S.2d 530, lv. denied 77 N.Y.2d 995, 571 N.Y.S.2d 920, 575 N.E.2d 406).   We decline to exercise our power to address those contentions as a matter of discretion in the interest of justice (see, CPL 470.15[6][a] ).   Finally, the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672), and the sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe.

Judgment unanimously affirmed.

MEMORANDUM: