Opinion
November 19, 1984
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Tomei, J.).
Judgment affirmed.
Although the prosecutor should not have elicited hearsay testimony regarding an uncharged crime (the breaking of a windshield), prompt curative instructions alleviated any possibility of prejudice ( People v Santiago, 52 N.Y.2d 865). In addition thereto, we note that defense counsel subsequently elicited testimony regarding the uncharged crime.
Defendant's other contentions have been considered and have been found to be without merit. Mollen, P.J., Titone, Thompson and Weinstein, JJ., concur.