Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the trial court properly denied his application to review the personnel files of the police witnesses since he failed to present "some factual predicate" supporting such disclosure ( People v. Gissendanner, 48 N.Y.2d 543, 550; see, Civil Rights Law § 50-a).
We find no error in the court's Sandoval ruling permitting the People to question the defendant about two prior arrests which were adjourned on contemplation of dismissal ( see, People v Hightower, 163 A.D.2d 489; People v. Magee, 126 A.D.2d 573). In addition to limiting the initial inquiry to the underlying facts, the court fashioned further guidelines, depending on the course of the questioning, to minimize the risk of prejudice ( see, People v. Sandoval, 34 N.Y.2d 371).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.
Ritter, J.P., Friedmann, Krausman and McGinity, JJ., concur.