OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed. Because the accomplice testimony was corroborated with independent evidence as well as evidence that “harmonized” with the accomplice testimony, the evidence was legally sufficient to support defendant’s convictions (see People v Reome, 15 NY3d 188, 194 [2010]). Next, the trial judge did not abuse his discretion when denying defendant’s eve-of-trial application to relieve his second court-appointed attorney and to appoint substitute counsel. Finally, defendant argues that the trial judge’s failure to properly instruct the jury on the affirmative defense to Penal Law § 160.15 (4) affected the entire verdict. This claim is unpreserved for our review.

Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones concur.

*763 On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed in a memorandum.