Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
On this appeal the defendant contends that the court's alibi charge was confusing and shifted the burden of proof. Defense counsel did not object to the charge and, accordingly, any error of law was not preserved for appellate review (CPL 470.05; People v. Thomas, 50 N.Y.2d 467; People v. Cadorette, 83 A.D.2d 908, affd 56 N.Y.2d 1007); nor do we find any basis for reversal in the interest of justice (see, People v. Cadorette, supra; People v. Richardson, 114 A.D.2d 980).
We have examined the defendant's remaining contentions, including those raised in his pro se supplemental brief, and find them to be either unpreserved for appellate review or lacking merit. Niehoff, J.P., Rubin, Lawrence and Sullivan, JJ., concur.