Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that he was denied a fair trial by the admission of testimony relating to his prior bad acts and uncharged crimes (see, People v. Molineux, 168 N.Y. 264, 293). We disagree. Initially we note that many of the defendant's claims in this regard have not been preserved for appellate review (CPL 470.05; People v. Medina, 53 N.Y.2d 951). In any event, in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt in this case, including the testimony of three eyewitnesses to the crime, one of whom was the defendant's own son, any error in admitting the testimony of which the defendant complains was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt (see, People v. Cook, 42 N.Y.2d 204, 209; People v. Crimmins, 36 N.Y.2d 230, 240; cf., People v McKinney, 24 N.Y.2d 180; People v. Bolling, 120 A.D.2d 601, 602).
We find no basis for modifying the sentence imposed by the trial court (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Thompson, J.P., Bracken, Brown and Harwood, JJ., concur.