Defendant was properly convicted of completed rather than attempted robbery based upon his role in the asportation of car keys, for which there was ample evidence of larcenous intent ( see, People v. Smith, 140 A.D.2d 259). By failing to object, or by failing to request further relief after his objection was sustained, defendant failed to preserve his present challenges to the People's summation ( People v. Medina, 53 N.Y.2d 951), which, in any event, would not warrant reversal. Evidence that defendant was acquainted with a codefendant was relevant, under the circumstances of the case, and was properly admitted ( People v Hamlin, 71 N.Y.2d 750, 758; People v. Hurd, 160 A.D.2d 199, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 789). We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion. Defendant's remaining contentions are unpreserved and without merit.
Concur — Murphy, P. J., Milonas, Ellerin, Andrias and Colabella, JJ.