Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We reject defendant's contention that the verdict is against the weight of the evidence (see, People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495; People v. Walker, 175 A.D.2d 146, lv denied 78 N.Y.2d 1131). We also reject the contention that the discrepancy between the date of the sexual abuse alleged in the 11th count of the indictment (March 1996) and the evidence at trial of that conduct (February 1996) deprived defendant of fair notice of the accusation against him (see, People v. Cunningham, 48 N.Y.2d 938, 940; People v. Morgan, 246 A.D.2d 686, lv denied 91 N.Y.2d 975; People v. Glover, 185 A.D.2d 458, 459-460; cf., People v. Bigda, 184 A.D.2d 993). Defendant failed to preserve for our review his contention that the verdict is repugnant (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Alfaro, 66 N.Y.2d 985, 987; People v. Hird, 261 A.D.2d 953 [decided May 7, 1999]), and, in any event, that contention lacks merit (see, People v. Trappier, 87 N.Y.2d 55, 58; People v. Tucker, 55 N.Y.2d 1, 8, rearg denied 55 N.Y.2d 1039). Defendant was not deprived of effective assistance of counsel; his attorney afforded him meaningful representation (see, People v. Hobot, 84 N.Y.2d 1021, 1022; see also, People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708, 712-713; People v. Rivera, 71 N.Y.2d 705, 708-709). Finally, the sentence is neither unduly harsh nor severe.