Ordered that the 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 beyond a reasonable doubt. 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 (CPL 470.15).
Contrary to the defendant's contentions, we do not find that the court improvidently exercised its discretion in ruling, upon the Sandoval application (People v. Sandoval, 34 N.Y.2d 371), that the People could cross-examine the defendant as to the nature of his prior conviction of attempted robbery in the third degree (see, People v. Bennette, 56 N.Y.2d 142, 146-148; People v Mayrant, 43 N.Y.2d 236, 239-240).
We note that the sentence imposed upon the defendant was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80), especially in light of the fact that the defendant could have received consecutive sentences herein.
We have examined the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Rubin, J.P., Balletta, Rosenblatt and Miller, JJ., concur.