Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the statements he made to the police admitting his participation in the crime should have been suppressed as the fruit of an unlawful, warrantless arrest. We disagree. The defendant had no expectation of privacy in the abandoned house where he was arrested "`that society is prepared to recognize as reasonable'" (People v Robinson, 100 A.D.2d 602). He therefore lacks standing to challenge the warrantless arrest by the police (see, People v Farinaro, 110 A.D.2d 653).
The defendant's remaining contention, relating to the court's charge, is unpreserved for appellate review (CPL 470.05) and, in any event, is without merit. Bracken, J.P., Lawrence, Miller and Copertino, JJ., concur.