Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the trial court's ruling on the People's reverse-Batson challenge ( see Batson v Kentucky, 476 US 79) was in error. We disagree. The prosecutor raised a reverse-Batson challenge, and the trial court determined that with respect to one peremptory strike, defense counsel's proffered explanation was pretextual ( see People v Payne, 88 NY2d 172, 181; People v Allen, 86 NY2d 101, 104). The trial court is in the best position to assess the credibility of counsel's explanations ( see Hernandez v New York, 500 US 352, 364; People v Jeffreys, 258 AD2d 474, 475). We discern no basis in the record to disturb the trial court's credibility assessment and determination ( see People v Chapman, 295 AD2d 359; People v Grier, 261 AD2d 555; People v Garrastazu, 238 AD2d 354).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.