Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the defendant's motion for a mistrial. The decision whether to grant a motion for mistrial rests within the sound discretion of the trial court ( see People v Ortiz, 54 NY2d 288, 292 [1981]), which is in the best position to determine if it is necessary to protect the defendant's right to a fair trial ( see People v Cooper, 173 AD2d 551). Although one of the prosecution's witnesses testified on cross-examination that she knew the defendant "for robbing other people," the Supreme Court struck the testimony, gave a curative instruction, and, upon the defendant's motion for a mistrial, gave further curative instructions ( see People v Hernandez, 11 AD3d 479).
The sentence imposed was not excessive ( see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).