Defendant's arguments that the court should have charged the jury that it could consider the victim's reputation for violence, prior assaults and threats, and should have given the "first blow" charge are not preserved. Nor did defendant raise the arguments he now raises as to the charge on justification, which is similarly unpreserved. (People v. Whalen, 59 N.Y.2d 273.)
Defendant's awareness at the time of the incident of the victim's violent behavior was relevant to his claim of justification (People v. Miller, 39 N.Y.2d 543, 552), and a charge to this effect would have been appropriate (People v. Le Mieux, 51 N.Y.2d 981, 982). However, reversal in the interest of justice is not warranted in the circumstances presented, since the charge as given furnished a thorough exposition of defendant's position with respect to justification and self-defense and the People's burden to disprove this contention beyond a reasonable doubt, and adequately advised the jury to consider defendant's knowledge of the victim's reputation and past acts. (Cf., People v. Dory, 59 N.Y.2d 121.)
We have considered the remaining arguments and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Kupferman, J.P., Carro, Asch and Wallach, JJ.