Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contentions, the Supreme Court did not improvidently deny his CPL 330.30 motion to set aside the verdict on the ground of newly-discovered evidence. The defendant failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the allegedly newly-discovered evidence could not have been discovered before the trial by the exercise of due diligence and that this evidence would probably change the result if a new trial were granted (see, People v. Mossop, 191 A.D.2d 715; People v. Fielder, 154 A.D.2d 388).
The defendant's sentence was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). O'Brien, J.P., Joy, Goldstein and Florio, JJ., concur.