DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgments are affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, he was not eligible for youthful offender treatment. Since the defendant was convicted of armed felonies (see CPL 1.20[b]; Penal Law §§ 70.02[a], 160.15), he could only be adjudicated a youthful offender if "mitigating circumstances" exist "that bear directly upon the manner in which the crime was committed," or if his participation in the crimes was "relatively minor" (CPL 720.10[i], [ii]). Here, the defendant offered the sentencing court no evidence of mitigating circumstances relating to the manner in which the subject robberies were committed, and his role in the robberies was not minor. Accordingly, he could not be adjudicated a youthful offender (see People v. Fields, 287 A.D.2d 577, 578; People v. Victor J., 283 A.D.2d 205; People v. Boyd, 254 A.D.2d 740, 741; People v. Cuatle, 212 A.D.2d 625).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.
SANTUCCI, J.P., SMITH, H. MILLER and ADAMS, JJ., concur.