¶ Judgment affirmed.
¶ We disapprove that portion of the trial court's charge which reads: "If the jury should say that every witness whose manners or morals they may not approve of must necessarily be perjuring herself or himself on the stand[,] then a great many of the crimes that come before juries would go unpunished" (cf. People v. Andino, 98 A.D.2d 750; People v. Hurel, 60 A.D.2d 537). While a charge referring to witnesses with different manners or morals, as a whole, is appropriate, the last part of the quoted sentence was improper. However, defendant did not object to any portion of the charge or request any curative instruction at a point where an opportunity to do so was present (cf. People v. Gonzales, 56 N.Y.2d 1001, 1002). The question of law was therefore not preserved for appellate review (CPL 470.05, subd 2). Under the circumstances of this case, it should not serve as the basis of reversal ( People v. Jones, 81 A.D.2d 22; cf. People v. Daniels, 88 A.D.2d 392, 403).
¶ We have examined defendant's other contentions and find them to be without merit. Titone, J.P., Mangano, Gibbons and O'Connor, JJ., concur.