Opinion
February 21, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Beldock, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
There is no merit to the defendant's contention that the expert testimony of child sexual-abuse trauma syndrome was inadmissible, as this testimony helped to explain the four complainants' behavior towards the defendant after the attacks, which was not within the purview of the average juror (see, People v. Taylor, 75 N.Y.2d 277; People v. Naranjo, 194 A.D.2d 747; People v. Guce, 164 A.D.2d 946; cf., People v. Singh, 186 A.D.2d 285).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or do not warrant reversal in light of the overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt. Mangano, P.J., Bracken, Altman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.