Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The Rosario violations claimed by the defendant are unpreserved for appellate review ( see, People v Kane, 85 NY2d 1024, 1027; People v Rogelio, 79 NY2d 843, 844; People v Wright, 204 AD2d 372, 373; People v Ciro, 195 AD2d 568, 569). The defendant's contention that he is entitled to a new trial because of prosecutorial misconduct is similarly unpreserved for appellate review ( see, People v Comer, 73 NY2d 955; People v Medina, 53 NY2d 951). We decline to reach these issues in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.