Ordered that the judgment is affirmed. We reject the defendant's contention that he was denied a fundamental right to be present at all material stages of the trial by his exclusion from sidebar discussions with prospective jurors during voir dire ( see, People v. Antommarchi, 80 N.Y.2d 247; People v. Sloan, 79 N.Y.2d 386). The record demonstrates that the defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to be present since, prior to the commencement of voir dire, the court acknowledged, in the defendant's presence, receipt of a waiver executed by the defendant which indicated that he was fully advised of his rights and that he agreed to waive his right to be present ( see, People v. Rivera, 237 A.D.2d 539; People v. Spruill, 212 A.D.2d 381; see also, People v. Underwood, 201 A.D.2d 597). The defendant's contention that the People failed to disprove his justification defense beyond a reasonable doubt is unpreserved for appellate review ( see, CPL 470.

We reject the defendant's contention that he was denied his fundamental right to be present at all material stages of the trial when the court heard further argument on his Sandoval motion and made its ruling in his absence. A review of the record demonstrates that the defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to be present when defense counsel informed the court, in the defendant's presence, that the defendant had signed a written waiver indicating that he was fully advised of his rights and that he agreed to waive his right to be present ( see, People v. Rivera, 237 A.D.2d 539; People v People, 223 A.D.2d 732; People v. Thomas, 221 A.D.2d 388; People v McGee, 214 A.D.2d 587). The defendant's sentence was not excessive ( see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).