We reject defendant's challenge to the suppression court's refusal to permit him to call the victim at the Wade hearing, defendant having failed to establish, prima facie, that the lineup was unduly suggestive (People v Chipp, 75 N.Y.2d 327, cert denied 498 U.S. 833).
Nor was it an abuse of discretion for the trial court to preclude defendant from demonstrating his "speaking style" so as to display to the jury the distinctiveness of his gold tooth. The opportunity for defendant to mislead the jury outweighed the probative value of the evidence, and the unadorned display of the tooth was sufficient to support the defense of misidentification (People v Scarola, 71 N.Y.2d 769; People v Veal, 158 A.D.2d 633).
Most of defendant's remaining challenges are unpreserved. and all are without merit.
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Carro, Asch and Rubin, JJ.