Opinion
May 5, 1997
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dunlop, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
As the defendant did not promptly object when the court required the People to offer race-neutral explanations for only two of the five black venirepersons stricken by their peremptory challenges, his contention that the court should have requested explanations for the exclusion of all five black jurors is unpreserved for appellate review ( see, People v. Font, 223 A.D.2d 600).
Although the trial court erred in failing to provide the requested readback of relevant cross-examination testimony of the undercover officer, such failure is not reversible error as it did not seriously prejudice the defendant ( see, People v. Lourido, 70 N.Y.2d 428). The information was elicited elsewhere in the examination of the witness and was read to the jury.
The sentence imposed was not excessive ( see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
Mangano, P.J., Joy, McGinity and Luciano, JJ., concur.