Opinion
November 7, 1991
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Dominick R. Massaro, J.).
Defendant's failure to make a clear factual record of alleged prejudicial use of peremptory challenges by the prosecutor in the jury voir dire process, or to provide any record conclusively stating ethnicity and background information which might have been relevant in connection with the voir dire precludes meaningful appellate review of the issue (see, e.g., People v Hentley, 155 A.D.2d 392, lv denied 75 N.Y.2d 919).
Defendant's claim that he was deprived of his right to be present at a material stage of his trial is unpreserved for appellate review as a matter of law, as neither defendant nor his counsel objected to defendant's absence from a bench conference requested by defense counsel and held in the court's robing room (CPL 470.05). Were we to review the claim in the interest of justice, we would find it to be meritless in the circumstances.
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Milonas, Asch, Kassal and Smith, JJ.