PEOPLE v. THOMAS

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The exclusion of cross-examination concerning prior convictions is a matter largely resting within the discretion of the trial court (see, People v Sandoval, 34 N.Y.2d 371; People v Mackey, 49 N.Y.2d 274). We find that the trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion. The fact that the defendant may specialize in one area of criminal activity will not automatically shield him from cross-examination as to prior convictions in that area (see, People v Rahman, 46 N.Y.2d 882; People v Adams, 174 A.D.2d 626).

In light of the defendant's extensive criminal history, the sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).

The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit. Balletta, J.P., Rosenblatt, Santucci and Joy, JJ., concur.