PEOPLE v. WILLIAMS

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that because the prosecutor elicited his videotaped statement, the prosecutor should have been disqualified. The defendant, however, failed to demonstrate the necessity of the prosecutor's testimony, or that the prosecutor's pretrial activity was a material issue in the case ( see, People v Paperno, 54 NY2d 294). Accordingly, the court's ruling denying the defendant's motion to disqualify the prosecutor was proper ( see, People v Paperno, supra; People v Rufino, 198 AD2d 7; People v Wynn, 176 AD2d 443).