Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, the defendant's guilt was proven beyond a reasonable doubt (see, Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319; People v Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620, 621). The evidence, although circumstantial, was inconsistent with the defendant's innocence and excluded to a moral certainty every other reasonable hypothesis but his guilt (see, People v. Way, 59 N.Y.2d 361, 365; People v. Milea, 112 A.D.2d 1011, lv denied 66 N.Y.2d 921).
The People's cross-examination of the defendant with respect to a prior burglary conviction did not deprive him of a fair trial (see, People v. Pavao, 59 N.Y.2d 282, 292). The fact that a defendant may specialize in one type of criminal activity should not shield him from impeachment with prior similar convictions (see, People v. Rahman, 62 A.D.2d 968, affd 46 N.Y.2d 882; People v. Cherry, 106 A.D.2d 458). Mangano, J.P., Weinstein, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.