—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Bárbaro, J.), rendered May 1, 2002, convicting him of assault in
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant’s contention, he was not denied his right to a fair trial. First, the defendant’s contention that the trial court improperly limited his ability to impeach the complainant is unpreserved for appellate review (see People v George, 67 NY2d 817 [1986]; People v Sutherland, 280 AD2d 622 [2001]; People v Mercado, 135 AD2d 661 [1987]). In any event, this contention is without merit (see People v Bornholdt, 33 NY2d 75 [1973], cert denied sub nom. Victory v New York, 416 US 905 [1974]; People v Sorge, 301 NY 198 [1950]; People v Savastano, 280 AD2d 498 [2001]; People v Singh, 262 AD2d 431 [1999]; People v Coleman, 195 AD2d 475 [1993]; People v Meade, 198 AD2d 307 [1993]). In addition, viewing the court’s charge as a whole, the instructions regarding credibility adequately conveyed to the jury the appropriate standard by which to evaluate the testimony of the complainant (see People v Brown, 220 AD2d 606 [1995]; People v Inniss, 192 AD2d 553 [1993], affd 83 NY2d 653 [1994]; People v Sherman, 156 AD2d 889 [1989]).
The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit. Santucci, J.P., Krausman, Cozier and Mastro, JJ., concur.