PEOPLE v. LEON-RAMOS

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant argues that he was deprived of a fair trial by the trial court's refusal to inquire, outside the jury's presence, about a conversation between two of the prosecution's witnesses, which occurred during a brief recess immediately after the first witness's testimony and just prior to the second witness's testimony. This argument is unpreserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05; People v. Iannelli, 69 NY2d 684, 685, cert denied 482 US 914; People v. Thomas, 50 NY2d 467, 473; People v. Jones, 284 AD2d 411). Moreover, the defendant abandoned that argument by cross-examining the second witness without inquiring about the subject conversation ( see People v. Graves, 85 NY2d 1024, 1027; cf. People v. Perdomo, 280 AD2d 617). In any event, the court's ruling was a provident exercise of its discretion.