—[*1] Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York (Barbara Zolot of counsel), for appellant.

Robert T. Johnson, District Attorney, Bronx (Frances Y. Wang of counsel), for respondent.

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (John A. Barone, J.), rendered February 4, 2004, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to a term of 5 to 10 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly exercised its discretion in precluding defendant from cross-examining the arresting officers about alleged prior bad acts, where the source of defendant's information about such acts was mere rumor. Accordingly, defendant lacked a good faith basis for such inquiry (see People v Schwartzman, 24 NY2d 241, 244 [1969], cert denied 396 US 846 [1969]). We note that the court provided defendant with an ample opportunity to delve into the officers' police disciplinary histories. Since defendant did not assert a constitutional right to make the excluded inquiries, his constitutional argument is unpreserved (see People v Angelo, 88 NY2d 217, 222 [1996]; People v Gonzalez, 54 NY2d 729 [1981]), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find no violation of defendant's right to confront witnesses and present a defense (see Crane v Kentucky, 476 US 683, 689-690 [1986]; Delaware v Van Arsdall, 475 US 673, 678-679 [1986]).

The challenged portions of the prosecutor's summation did not deprive defendant of a fair trial, and the court properly exercised its discretion in denying defendant's mistrial motion (see People v Overlee, 236 AD2d 133 [1997], lv denied 91 NY2d 976 [1998]; People v D'Alessandro, 184 AD2d 114, 118-119 [1992], lv denied 81 NY2d 884 [1993]). The court's [*2]curative actions were sufficient to prevent any improprieties in the summation from causing any prejudice. Concur—Lippman, P.J., Mazzarelli, Sullivan, Nardelli and Sweeny, JJ.