Opinion
August 7, 1989
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Felig, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed. The defendant contends that the trial court's response to the jury's request during deliberations for a readback of the complainant's testimony impermissibly restricted his right to have the testimony read back. This issue is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Sturgis, 124 A.D.2d 1045). Furthermore, reversal is not warranted in the interest of justice where, as here, it cannot be said that the instructions, as a whole, adversely affected the jury's actions (see, People v Pena, 50 N.Y.2d 400). Mollen, P.J., Thompson, Lawrence and Eiber, JJ., concur.