Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contentions regarding the convictions of rape in the second degree and incest during specified two-month periods are not preserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05; People v. Weldon, 191 AD2d 662; People v. Barrett, 166 AD2d 657, 658; People v. Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245). In any event, the contentions are without merit. The defendant repeatedly raped and sexually abused his biological daughter over a period of five years. The victim could not recall the exact dates of the incidents. The indictment charged the defendant with a specific crime during a specified two-month period. In view of the age of the victim, the repetitive and clandestine nature of the crimes, the continuous and long-term nature of the abuse, and the fact that time is not a material element of the charged crimes, the two-month intervals were reasonably specific and provided the defendant with adequate notice ( see People v. Watt, 81 NY2d 772, 774; People v. Keindl, 68 NY2d 410, 419; People v. Morris, 61 NY2d 290, 293-296; People v. Cosby, 222 AD2d 690; People v. Barrett, supra at 658; People v. Willette, 109 AD2d 112, 114-115; People v. Coveney, 134 Misc 2d 894). Moreover, the counts are neither duplicitous nor multiplicitous ( see People v. Keindl, supra at 419; People v. Cosby, supra).
The defendant received the effective assistance of counsel ( see People v. Henry, 95 NY2d 563; People v. Benevento, 91 NY2d 708, 712).