DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant did not preserve for appellate review his claim that the court erred in failing to charge the jury that the testimony of his accomplice required corroboration, as he neither requested such a charge nor specifically objected to the court's failure to give it (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Gray, 86 N.Y.2d 10, 19; People v. James, 75 N.Y.2d 874, 875; People v. Ortiz, 215 A.D.2d 408; People v. Coico, 176 A.D.2d 339). In any event, reversal of the defendant's conviction is unwarranted. The complaining witness's identification testimony and the evidence that the defendant's brother, with whom the defendant lived, possessed goods stolen from the complaining witness, was sufficient corroboration of the accomplice's testimony, and the evidence of the defendant's guilt was overwhelming (see, People v. Jones, 85 N.Y.2d 823; People v. Breland, 83 N.Y.2d 286, 294; People v. Odiot, 242 A.D.2d 308; People v. Jones, 220 A.D.2d 689).