Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant has failed to preserve for appellate review his contention that the trial court erred in permitting a prosecution witness to testify on redirect examination as to a prior consistent statement (see, CPL 470.05). In any event, we find that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting such testimony in light of defense counsel's attempt to create an inference that the witness' testimony that the defendant was in possession of a gun at the time of the commission of the crime was a recent fabrication (see, People v McClean, 69 N.Y.2d 426, 428; People v Melendez, 55 N.Y.2d 445, 451). Kooper, J.P., Sullivan, Harwood and Balletta, JJ., concur.