Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, we find that the trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in denying his motion to set aside the verdict pursuant to CPL 330.30 and 330.40 Crim. Proc. without a hearing concerning certain comments the foreperson of the jury allegedly made to a court officer after the verdict was rendered. Since the defendant's motion to set aside the verdict was "based on little more than speculation as to the possibility of prejudice" (Snediker v County of Orange, 58 N.Y.2d 647, 649; People v Rhodes, 92 A.D.2d 744, 745), and the moving papers were supported solely by hearsay allegations (see, e.g., People v Bellamy, 158 A.D.2d 525, 526; People v Fusillo, 94 A.D.2d 802), the motion was properly denied.
The defendant's other contentions are without merit. Bracken, J.P., Sullivan, Balletta and Copertino, JJ., concur.