THE PEOPLE v. JAMES FRANKLIN

Ordered that the judgment and the resentence are affirmed. The defendant's contention that a portion of the court's jury charge deprived him of the force of his defense ( see generally People v Williams, 5 NY3d 732) is unpreserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05). In any event, any error in this portion of the jury charge was harmless ( see People v Crimmins, 36 NY2d 230). The defendant's remaining contentions with respect to additional alleged errors in stated portions of the jury charge are also unpreserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05) and, in any event, are without merit.

The defendant's contention that the trial court's Allen charge ( see Allen v United States, 164 US 492), was improper is also unpreserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05). In any event, the charge as a whole was balanced, proper, and encouraging rather than coercive ( see People v Kinard, 215 AD2d 591).

Contrary to the defendant's contention, he received meaningful representation ( see People v Seaton, 45 AD3d 875, 876; see also People v Benevento, 91 NY2d 708; People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137).

The resentence imposed was not excessive ( see People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80).