Opinion
April 28, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Edward McLaughlin, J.).
Since defendant did not object to the departure of sworn jurors during further jury selection, his claim that the court violated CPL 270.15 (3) by failing to obtain his consent is unpreserved for appellate review and we decline to review it in the interest of justice ( People v. Love, 204 A.D.2d 97, 99, affd 84 N.Y.2d 917). Since defendant was clearly aware in advance that the sworn jurors were to be excused, normal preservation rules apply ( cf., People v. Damiano, 87 N.Y.2d 477). Were we to review this claim, we would find that defendant has not demonstrated any prejudice warranting reversal ( People v. Cassado, 156 A.D.2d 183, lv denied 75 N.Y.2d 917; see also, CPL 470.05).
We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion.
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Rosenberger, Nardelli, Rubin and Andrias, JJ.