People v. Bouknight

The defendant’s contention that the Supreme Court erred in permitting various prosecution witnesses to testify regarding his past actions with respect to the victim’s daughter is unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Dahlbender, 23 AD3d 493, 494 [2005]). In any event, contrary to the defendant’s claim, “[t]he challenged evidence did not ‘concern the type of illegal or immoral conduct which would deprive the defendant of a fair trial’ ” (People v Jenneman, 37 AD3d 736, 737-738 [2007], quoting People v Gonsa, 220 AD2d 27, 30 [1996]; People v Hall, 299 AD2d 493 [2002];…