Opinion
June 20, 1996
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Berkman, J.).
Defendant's claim that the trial court unduly restricted his cross-examination of witnesses is unpreserved. Defendant did nothing to call the trial court's attention to the purposes of the precluded questions ( People v. George, 67 N.Y.2d 817), and failed to express to the trial court the theory of admissibility advanced on appeal ( People v. Lyons, 81 N.Y.2d 753). In any event, if we were to review the claim in the interest of justice, we would find that the court's rulings did not deprive defendant of a fair trial by hindering his ability to present his defenses, and were otherwise proper exercises of discretion ( People v Schwartzman, 24 N.Y.2d 241, 244, cert denied 396 U.S. 846).
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Milonas, Wallach, Ross and Nardelli, JJ.