Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Westchester County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (5).
The defendant's contention that the trial court committed reversible error when it denied his request for a missing witness charge is without merit. The defendant did not meet his initial burden of demonstrating that the uncalled witness was knowledgeable about a material issue and that the witness's testimony would have been favorable to him (see, People v Dianda, 70 N.Y.2d 894; People v. Gonzalez, 68 N.Y.2d 424).
Similarly without merit is the defendant's contention that he is entitled to a new trial because the People withheld Brady material (Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83). Brady material is defined as information in the prosecution's possession that is both favorable and material to the defense. We find that the information allegedly withheld here does not fall within the rule enunciated in Brady, as it could not be considered either exculpatory or material (see, People v Vilardi, 76 N.Y.2d 67; People v. Nedrick, 166 A.D.2d 725). Thompson, J.P., Eiber, Balletta and O'Brien, JJ., concur.