Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the trial court erred in submitting a verdict sheet which contained elements of the crimes to the jury. This contention is unpreserved for appellate review, as at trial the defendant only objected to the failure to include additional elements on the verdict sheet, and not to the fact that certain elements of the crimes charged were included therein (see, People v. Martin, 50 N.Y.2d 1029; People v. Liccione, 50 N.Y.2d 850; see also, People v. Patterson, 158 A.D.2d 557).
Also unpreserved for appellate review is the defendant's contention that he is entitled to a de novo suppression hearing due to the People's failure to turn over certain Rosario material until after the hearing had been completed (see, People v. Cannon, 171 A.D.2d 752; People v. Alvarez, 150 A.D.2d 470).
Finally, under the circumstances the trial court did not err in instructing the jury that the defendant's weapons possession cannot be included in the "home or place of business" exception provided by Penal Law § 265.02(4) (see, People v. Maniscalco, 198 A.D.2d 378; see also, People v. Powell, 54 N.Y.2d 524). Mangano, P.J., Thompson, Ritter and Florio, JJ., concur.