Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contentions regarding the legal sufficiency of the evidence are unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v. Artis, 220 A.D.2d 441, 442). Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15).
The admission as an excited utterance of the audiotape of the emergency telephone call reporting the discovery of the corpse was proper (see, People v. Buie, 86 N.Y.2d 501; People v. Masas, 244 A.D.2d 433; People v. Palmer, 237 A.D.2d 311; People v. Vasquez, 88 N.Y.2d 561, 579). Here, the evidence showed that the emergency call was made as soon as the caller was able to reach a working telephone.
The court providently exercised its discretion in restricting the defense counsel from cross-examining the prosecution's witnesses regarding a State Investigation Commission report on the ground that the report concerned collateral issues (see, People v. Scarola, 71 N.Y.2d 769, 777; People v. McGriff, 201 A.D.2d 672). The cross-examination thwarted by the trial court was to consist of nothing more than disparaging questions bearing on police credibility but irrelevant to the issues of the defendant's guilt (see, People v. Ashner, 190 A.D.2d 238).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.
Copertino, J. P., Altman, Florio and Luciano, JJ., concur.