Ordered that judgment is affirmed.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant's guilt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15).
The trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in permitting the prosecutor to cross-examine the defendant with respect to his prior convictions for assault and criminal facilitation (see, People v. Sandoval, 34 N.Y.2d 371). These offenses were relevant to the defendant's credibility as a witness and his willingness to place his interests above those of society (see, People v. Sandoval, supra; People v. Noeth, 162 A.D.2d 724). Moreover, the defendant's assault conviction was not so remote in time as to mandate preclusion (see, People v Salcedo, 133 A.D.2d 129; People v. Scott, 118 A.D.2d 881).
Finally, the defendant's challenge to the imposition of a mandatory surcharge is premature while he is still incarcerated (see, People v. West, 124 Misc.2d 622; People v. Barrios, 163 A.D.2d 579; People v. Koslow, 160 A.D.2d 954). Sullivan, J.P., Eiber, Miller and Ritter, JJ., concur.