Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.
The court's Sandoval ruling that the defendant could be impeached by his previous robbery convictions was not an improvident exercise of its discretion (see, People v Mackey, 49 N.Y.2d 274, 281; People v Ellis, 162 A.D.2d 611; People v Woods, 158 A.D.2d 566; People v Branch, 155 A.D.2d 475).
The defendant challenged the admissibility of a videotaped statement on voluntariness grounds alone, and his decision to proceed to trial without objecting to its narrative of uncharged crimes amounts to a failure to preserve the issue of the admissibility of evidence of uncharged crimes for appellate review. Mangano, P.J., Harwood, Miller and Santucci, JJ., concur.