Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the trial court properly admitted into evidence a transcript of testimony given by a prosecution witness at the first trial in this matter ( see CPL 670.10; People v Diaz, 97 NY2d 109, 117; People v Arroyo, 54 NY2d 567, 574, cert denied 456 US 979; People v Simmons, 36 NY2d 126, 130).
The trial court providently exercised its discretion in precluding expert testimony as to the defendant's susceptibility to police interrogation techniques ( see People v Lee, 96 NY2d 157, 162; People v Cronin, 60 NY2d 430, 433; People v Koury, 268 AD2d 896; People v Green, 250 AD2d 143; People v Bajraktari, 154 AD2d 542; People v Lea, 144 AD2d 863).
The defendant's remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, are without merit.