Opinion
August 2, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Goldstein, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that he was deprived of a fair trial because the prosecutor improperly exercised a peremptory challenge to exclude a female, black prospective juror (see, Batson v Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79) is unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v Bowman, 185 A.D.2d 891, 892; People v Holland, 179 A.D.2d 822, 824; People v Campanella, 176 A.D.2d 813), and we decline to reach this claim in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.
We have examined the defendant's contention that he was deprived of his right to be present during the impaneling of the jury when the court conducted side-bar conferences, outside of his presence, with 10 prospective jurors with respect to their ability to be unbiased and impartial (see, CPL 260.20; People v Antommarchi, 80 N.Y.2d 247), and find it to be without merit (see, People v Mitchell, 80 N.Y.2d 519; cf., People v Sloan, 79 N.Y.2d 386). Sullivan, J.P., Balletta, Ritter and Santucci, JJ., concur.