ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the trial court effectively deprived him of his right to present a defense by prospectively excluding certain testimony of a defense witness is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Jones, 171 A.D.2d 609). In any event, the trial court providently exercised its discretion in excluding this testimony because it was irrelevant and collateral, and would have invited the jury to engage in speculation (see, People v. Cancel, 176 A.D.2d 748).
ALTMAN, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, McGINITY and COZIER, JJ., concur.