DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the evidence was legally insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was aided by another actually present is not preserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05; People v. Bynum, 70 N.Y.2d 858). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution ( see People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish all of the elements of robbery in the second degree ( see Penal Law § 160.10; People v. Cabey, 85 N.Y.2d 417, 421-422; People v. Allah, 71 N.Y.2d 830, 832; People v. Borrero, 26 N.Y.2d 430, 436). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence ( see CPL § 470.15).
The prosecutor's reference in summation to alleged statements made by the defendant that were not introduced into evidence, while improper, was harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt ( see People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230).
The sentence imposed was not excessive ( see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
The defendant's remaining contentions either are unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.
PRUDENTI, P.J., ALTMAN, SMITH and CRANE, JJ., concur.