Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The trial court properly precluded the introduction of the defendant's exculpatory statement as part of the defense case. The defendant did not testify and, instead, proposed to offer the statement through the testimony of another defense witness.
The law does not permit the defendant to avoid taking the witness stand and to avoid being cross-examined by allowing his story to be presented through the hearsay testimony of another witness (see, People v Dvoroznak, 127 A.D.2d 785). The defendant made the exculpatory statement at a time when he had had an adequate opportunity to reflect upon his situation, i.e., approximately two hours after he had assaulted the complainant, and it constituted inadmissible hearsay evidence (see, People v Bearthea, 171 A.D.2d 751).
We find that the defendant's remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review. Mangano, P.J., Ritter, Pizzuto and Goldstein, JJ., concur.