Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the trial court properly admitted into evidence testimony regarding the defendant's involvement with the sale of marihuana and his prior confrontation with the victim and the victim's brother. The testimony was admissible to establish the defendant's motive to kill the victim, who had allegedly stolen money from the defendant while selling drugs for him (see, People v. Colon, 187 A.D.2d 445). Further, the probative value of the testimony outweighed its potential prejudice insofar as it was the only evidence of motive (see generally, People v. Ventimiglia, 52 N.Y.2d 350, 361). The trial court's limiting instructions curtailed any prejudice to the defendant resulting from the admission of the testimony.
By decision and order dated June 1, 1993, this Court declined to grant the defendant leave to appeal from an order denying his motion to vacate the judgment, and thus the issues raised by defendant concerning that motion are not properly before this Court for review (see, People v. Drummond, 104 A.D.2d 825, 826).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Sullivan, J.P., Rosenblatt, Copertino and Hart, JJ., concur.