Majority
—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Orgera, J.), rendered July 22, 1992, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant has not preserved for appellate review his challenge to the admission of testimony by a police witness that, in the witness’s experience, pre-recorded money is not recovered from drug dealers in "about 50 percent” of arrests (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Tevaha, 84 NY2d 879 ). In any event, we reject the defendant’s contention that he was denied a fair trial by the admission of this testimony since it was necessary to explain the absence of the pre-recorded money on the defendant (see, People v Tevaha, 204 AD2d 92 , affd 84 NY2d
The trial court’s Sandoval ruling was not an improvident exercise of discretion (see, People v Sandoval, 34 NY2d 371 ; People v Carrasquillo, 204 AD2d 735 ; People v Moise, 199 AD2d 423 ; People v King, 187 AD2d 612 ; People v Otero, 184 AD2d 484 ; People v Kyser, 147 AD2d 590 ; People v Rahman, 62 AD2d 968 , affd 46 NY2d 882 ).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80 ).
The defendant’s remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review, and, in any event, without merit. Bracken, J. P., Sullivan, Friedmann and Krausman, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- People v. Tevaha 84 NY2d 879 p. 469
- People v. Tevaha 204 AD2d 92 p. 469
- People v. Kelsey 194 AD2d 248 p. 470
- People v. McKnight 144 AD2d 702 p. 470
- People v. Sandoval 34 NY2d 371 p. 470
- People v. Carrasquillo 204 AD2d 735 p. 470
- People v. Moise 199 AD2d 423 p. 470
- People v. King 187 AD2d 612 p. 470
- People v. Kyser 147 AD2d 590 p. 470
- People v. Rahman 62 AD2d 968 p. 470
- People v. Rahman 46 NY2d 882 p. 470
- People v. Suitte 90 AD2d 80 p. 470