The court properly exercised its discretion when it inquired whether the jury, after deliberating for six hours, had agreed upon a verdict as to any of the multiple counts submitted, and when it then accepted a partial verdict (see People v. Mendez, 221 A.D.2d 162, 163, lv denied 87 N.Y.2d 923). There was nothing coercive or prejudicial about the court's actions (see Bordas v. Walker, 2000 WL 1867915, 2000 US Dist LEXIS 18324 [SDNY Dec 21, 2000]). Defendant's remaining contentions are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would reject them.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.