Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in determining that “substantial justice” dictated the denial of the defendant’s application for resentencing )(see People v Curry, 52 AD3d 732 [2008]; People v Flores, 50 AD3d 1156 [2008]; People v Stamps, 50 AD3d 827 [2008]).
The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Skelos, J.E, Santucci, McCarthy and Dickerson, JJ., concur.