Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that he was denied the opportunity to be present at a material stage of the trial, i.e., an off-the-record conference regarding his decision to testify and the prosecution's proposed cross-examination of him. In its decision denying the defendant's motion to set aside the verdict, however, the trial court found that the defendant was present during the conference, and we find no basis for disturbing the determination. Moreover, the conference involved a question of law for which the defendant's presence would not have been required (see, People v Velasco, 77 N.Y.2d 469, 472).
We find no merit to the defendant's contention that he was deprived of the opportunity to cross-examine a prosecution witness regarding his alleged gang affiliation. The trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in limiting the line of inquiry on the ground that it lacked a good-faith basis (see, People v George, 197 A.D.2d 588, 589; People v Rodriguez, 191 A.D.2d 723, 724).
The defendant's remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v Whalen, 59 N.Y.2d 273, 280) and, in any event, without merit. Balletta, J.P., Ritter, Copertino and Friedmann, JJ., concur.