DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
An alleged deprivation of the constitutional right to counsel may be raised on appeal, irrespective of whether such claim has been preserved for appellate review (see People v. Kinchen, 60 N.Y.2d 772, 773; People v. Samuels, 49 N.Y.2d 218, 221). However, since the factual record of the pretrial suppression hearing is insufficient, we are unable to review the defendant's right to counsel claim (see People v. Kinchen, supra at 773-774).
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the testimony of a detective recounting part of her interview with an eyewitness to the crime, who, inter alia, described the defendant, was properly admitted as background information to explain the events that led to the defendant's arrest (see People v. Stephens, 274 A.D.2d 487, 488). Moreover, the trial court instructed the jury that the testimony of such interview was not admitted for its truth, but rather to provide background information, which effectively eliminated any risk of prejudice to the defendant (see People v. Burrus, 182 A.D.2d 634).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.
SMITH, J.P., McGINITY, COZIER and MASTRO, JJ., concur.