Giving deference to the trial court's ability to observe demeanor, we conclude that the court properly granted the People's challenge for cause to a prospective juror ( see People v. Williams, 63 N.Y.2d 882, 885). Viewed as a whole, the panelist's responses established that he was too biased against the police to serve as an impartial juror in a case turning on police credibility ( see People v. Shtilman, 278 A.D.2d 5, lv denied 96 N.Y.2d 787).
The court properly admitted evidence of an uncharged drug transaction that occurred immediately after the charged sale. This testimony tended to complete the narrative, and it was relevant to the contested issues of identity and acting in concert ( see e.g. People v. Garcia, 276 A.D.2d 270, lv denied 95 N.Y.2d 963). Furthermore, the evidence was reliable, and the limiting instructions included in the court's final charge prevented any prejudice.
We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence.
We have considered and rejected defendant's remaining claims.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.