Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The trial court's charge on accomplice liability was not erroneous since it informed the jury that the defendant had to act with the mental culpability required for commission of the crimes charged (see, Penal Law § 20.00). Additionally, the court instructed the jury at length on the necessary elements of mental culpability with respect to each of the crimes charged (see, People v Wise, 135 A.D.2d 593; People v Newton, 120 A.D.2d 751; People v Compitiello, 118 A.D.2d 720; 1 CJI[NY] 20.05, at 771).
The contentions raised in the defendant's supplemental pro se brief are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Bracken, J.P., Copertino, Pizzuto and Santucci, JJ., concur.