Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's challenges to various questions posed by the prosecutor during direct and cross-examination, as well as comments made during summation, are unpreserved for appellate review. In the few instances when the defendant did object, he either made only general objections or failed to request a curative instruction when an objection was sustained ( see CPL 470.05; People v. Harripersaud, 4 AD3d 375; People v. Smith, 298 AD2d 607; People v. Udzinski, 146 AD2d 245). In any event, his contentions are without merit ( see People v. Soler, 294 AD2d 286; People v. Rodriguez, 284 AD2d 952; People v. Yang Hao Lu, 273 AD2d 329; People v. Attiya, 126 AD2d 733, 734; see also People v. Dawson, 50 NY2d 311, 321).
Furthermore, on an appeal of a codefendant, this Court has already considered an objection to the trial court's limitation of the complainant's cross-examination regarding facts underlying the complainant's youthful offender adjudication and determined that the youthful offender adjudication may not be used to impeach the complainant's credibility ( see People v. Harripersaud, supra).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.