Opinion
March 2, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Broomer, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Although it was improper for Assistant District Attorney Daniel Penofsky to have prosecuted this matter, since he was not admitted to the practice of law, the defendant has failed to demonstrate any resulting prejudice. Absent a showing of prejudice, this regrettable circumstance does not constitute reversible error (see, People v Carter, 77 N.Y.2d 95, 107, cert denied ___ US ___, 111 S Ct 1599; People v Jackson, 163 A.D.2d 489).
The defendant's contention with regard to the court's charge was not preserved for appellate review (CPL 470.05). In any event, the court's predeliberation Allen charge did not deprive the defendant of a fair trial (see, People v Innocent, 150 A.D.2d 608; People v Bowen, 134 A.D.2d 356).
Finally, we have reviewed the defendant's sentence and find it to be appropriate under all of the circumstances (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Bracken, J.P., Lawrence, Eiber and Miller, JJ., concur.