Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention regarding the inadequacy of the court's adverse inference charge, imposed as a sanction for the loss of Rosario material, is unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v Roe, 196 A.D.2d 899, 900; People v Thomas, 50 N.Y.2d 467) and, in any event, without merit (see, People v Martinez, 71 N.Y.2d 937).
We have examined the defendant's remaining contention and find it to be without merit. Sullivan, J.P., Rosenblatt, O'Brien and Thompson, JJ., concur.