Appeal by the de
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant’s contention that certain testimony constituted inadmissible hearsay is not preserved for appellate review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Velez, 64 AD3d 621, 622 [2009]; People v Ketteles, 62 AD3d 902, 905 [2009]; People v Bryan, 50 AD3d 1049, 1050 [2008]; People v Antongiorgi, 242 AD2d 578 [1997]; People v Merchant, 150 AD2d 730, 731 [1989]). In any event, the defendant’s contention is without merit (see People v Walker, 70 AD3d 870, 871 [2010]; People v Chandler, 59 AD3d 562, 562 [2009]; People v Arrington, 158 AD2d 461 [1990]).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 [1982]).
The defendant’s remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, do not require reversal. Skelos, J.P., Angiolillo, Leventhal and Roman, JJ., concur.