Opinion
October 26, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Katz, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention the trial court did not improperly preclude him from presenting evidence that another person had a motive for committing the crimes with which he was charged. The defense counsel's bare allegations did no more than raise a mere suspicion that another person committed the crimes and failed to show a clear link between that third party and the crimes ( see, People v. McDonald, 231 A.D.2d 647; People v. DiPalo, 221 A.D.2d 463).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved
for appellate review or without merit.
Pizzuto, J. P., Joy, Florio and Luciano, JJ., concur.