ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the trial court providently exercised its discretion in making its Sandoval ruling (see People v. Sandoval, 34 N.Y.2d 371, 374-375), as it struck a proper balance between the probative worth of the evidence and its possible prejudice to the defendant (see People v. Forino, 287 A.D.2d 519, 520; People v. Sobers, 272 A.D.2d 418, 419; People v. Dwyer, 243 A.D.2d 645).
Additionally, the trial court providently exercised its discretion in denying the defendant's motion for a mistrial based on the complainant's unsolicited testimony during cross-examination that the defendant "robbed * * * from the other floors" in the building (see People v. Ortiz, 54 N.Y.2d 288, 292; People v. Caban, 224 A.D.2d 705). Any prejudice to the defendant that might have resulted from the complainant's testimony was alleviated as the court directed the jury to disregard the testimony (see People v. Santiago, 52 N.Y.2d 865; People v. Young, 48 N.Y.2d 995).
FLORIO, J.P., FEUERSTEIN, FRIEDMANN and RIVERA, JJ., concur.