Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contentions, we find that the reference to uncharged crimes during the testimony of the complaining witness did not warrant the declaration of a mistrial as requested by the defendant and does not warrant reversal of his judgment of conviction in light of the fact that the trial court sustained defense counsel's objections and gave prompt curative instructions which were sufficient to dispel the prejudicial effect of the error (see, People v Blasich, 73 N.Y.2d 673, 682; People v Santiago, 52 N.Y.2d 865).
We have examined the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Mollen, P.J., Thompson, Lawrence and Eiber, JJ., concur.