Opinion
April 27, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Colabella, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that his statement to the police should have been suppressed because it was elicited by trickery or deception is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Dunn, 85 N.Y.2d 956). In any event, the contention is without merit since the deceptive stratagem used to elicit the statement was not so fundamentally unfair as to deny him due process (see, People v. Tarsia, 50 N.Y.2d 1; People v. Darvie, 224 A.D.2d 442; People v. Hassell, 180 A.D.2d 819).
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in determining that a juror was unavailable for continued service as a result of illness (see, CPL former 270.35; People Woodward, 223 A.D.2d 746; People v. Jamison, 203 A.D.2d 385).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.
Santucci, J.P., Altman, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.