Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
There is no merit to the defendant's claim that the judgment should be reversed because the prosecution impermissibly delayed in disclosing certain Brady material ( see Brady v Maryland, 373 US 83). The material at issue was turned over to the defendant at a pretrial hearing and within sufficient time for him to use it in a meaningful fashion during cross-examination or as evidence during his trial ( see People v Cortijo, 70 NY2d 868, 870; People v Rodriguez, 281 AD2d 644, 645). There was no indication that a reasonable possibility existed that earlier disclosure of the material might have led to a different outcome of the trial ( see People v Vilardi, 76 NY2d 67, 74).
The defendant's remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05) and, in any event, are without merit.