Opinion
March 7, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Dominic Massaro, J.).
Defendant has failed to preserve two of his claims regarding the admission of evidence of uncharged crimes (People v Guerrero, 191 A.D.2d 251, lv denied 81 N.Y.2d 1014), and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. If we were to review them, we would find that testimony that one of the victims of the robbery was taken to the rooftop and raped by two of defendant's accomplices in order to "use her as an example" so that she and her friends would reveal the drug location that defendant and his cohorts sought to rob, "was admissible to complete the narrative of the episode" (People v. Gines, 36 N.Y.2d 932, 932-933), was "`inextricably interwoven'" with the facts of the crimes charged (People v. Mosely, 187 A.D.2d 374, 375), and served as "necessary background information" in the case (People v. Vega, 169 A.D.2d 586, 587).
Evidence of defendant's use of an alias was admissible, even though defendant did not testify, in order to explain the discrepancy caused by defendant when he signed his confession using the last name of his alias and his true first name (People v. Vernon, 209 A.D.2d 283).
As to the preserved claim, defendant was not prejudiced by the erroneous admission of testimony that two of his accomplices fled from the scene in a car with a screwdriver in its ignition, in light of the court's curative instructions, and defendant's failure to either object to the instructions or move for a mistrial thereafter (People v. Heide, 84 N.Y.2d 943).
We have considered defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Ellerin, Wallach and Tom, JJ.