DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the trial court did not improperly limit the defense counsel' s cross-examination of the complainant. The law is well settled that the nature and extent of cross-examination are matters within the court's sound discretion (see, People v. Hudy, 73 N.Y.2d 40, 56; People v. Duffy, 36 N.Y.2d 258; People v. McGriff, 201 A.D.2d 672; People v. Boyajian, 148 A.D.2d 740, 741).
The defendant's sentence was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 85).
The defendant's remaining contention is without merit.