DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that he was improperly precluded from impeaching the complainant's credibility with a prior inconsistent statement is not preserved for appellate review (see, People v. Voliton, 83 N.Y.2d 192, 195-196; People v. Fleming, 70 N.Y.2d 947; People v. Love, 57 N.Y.2d 1023, 1025). In any event, the court properly limited cross-examination of the complainant since the defendant failed to establish that the complainant's prior statement was, in fact, inconsistent with the challenged portions of her trial testimony (see, People v. Bornholdt, 33 N.Y.2d 75; People v. Meade, 198 A.D.2d 307; People v. Wise, 176 A.D.2d 595).
The defendant's remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, without merit.