Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the court improperly refused to redact his statement to delete his three references to his having been previously incarcerated is without merit. Such references were inextricably interwoven with the defendant's description of the events, and were necessary to complete the narrative of his version of the incident (see, People v Cook, 42 N.Y.2d 204; People v Gines, 36 N.Y.2d 932; People v Rodriguez, 207 A.D.2d 917; People v Campbell, 204 A.D.2d 474; People v Lemma, 201 A.D.2d 669).
Moreover, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Balletta, J.P., Miller, O'Brien and Copertino, JJ., concur.