It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him following a nonjury trial of three counts each of sexual abuse in the first degree (Penal Law § 130.65) and endangering the welfare of a child (§ 260.10 [1]). We reject defendant's contention that County Court erred in admitting the testimony of an expert concerning Child Sexual Abuse Accommodation Syndrome ( see People v Gunther, 67 AD3d 1477; People v Krause, 187 AD2d 1019, 1020, lv denied 81 NY2d 842). Viewing the evidence in light of the elements of the crimes in this nonjury trial ( see People v Danielson, 9 NY3d 342, 349), we reject defendant's further contention that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence ( see generally People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). The court's determination to credit the testimony of the victim is entitled to deference, and we see no reason to disturb that determination ( see People v Stone, 49 AD3d 1314, lv denied 10 NY3d 965). Defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that the court erred in setting the expiration date of the order of protection ( see People v Nieves, 2 NY3d 310, 315-317). In any event, that contention is without merit inasmuch as the court properly specified an expiration date in accordance with CPL 530.13 (former [4]), the version of the statute in effect when the judgment was rendered ( see People v Lake, 45 AD3d 1409, 1410-1411, lv denied 10 NY3d 767; People v Moss [appeal No. 1], 45 AD3d 1412, lv denied 10 NY3d 768).