Opinion
January 21, 1997.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Rothwax, J.), rendered April 6, 1994, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of burglary in the third degree and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent prison terms of 3*/2 to 7 years and 1 year, respectively, and a $5,000 fine, unanimously affirmed.
Before: Sullivan, J. P., Wallach, Rubin, Tom and Andrias, JJ.
The trial court's Sandoval ruling was a proper exercise of discretion ( People v Walker, 83 NY2d 455). Defendant's theft-related convictions were highly relevant to his credibility, notwithstanding any similarity to the present charges ( see, People v Pavao, 59 NY2d 282, 292), and defendant cannot shield himself from impeachment simply because he has specialized in theft-related crimes.
We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion. The record does not support defendant's contention that the court employed impermissible criteria in imposing sentence.