Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
On appeal, the defendant contends that his statements to the police should have been suppressed because they were the product of an illegal detention and arrest. Since the defendant failed to raise these claims in his moving papers or at the suppression hearing, they are unpreserved for appellate review ( see, People v Tutt, 38 NY2d 1011; People v Alexander, 226 AD2d 548).
The sentence imposed was neither harsh nor excessive under the circumstances of this case ( see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).