People v. Inniss

The defendant’s contentions raised in point one of his brief are partially unpreserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 *742[2]). In any event, those contentions do not warrant reversal (see People v Lewis, 48 AD3d 483, 484 [2008]; People v Wright, 40 AD3d 1021 [2007]; see also People v Singh, 299 AD2d 498, 499 [2002]).

The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]). Skelos, J.E, Dickerson, Leventhal and Lott, JJ., concur.