DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Under the circumstances of this case, the trial court providently exercised its discretion in denying the defendant's request for an adjournment made on the eve of trial. The defendant failed to meet his burden of demonstrating that the requested adjournment was necessitated by forces beyond his control and was not a dilatory tactic (see People v. Brown, 277 A.D.2d 246; see generally People v. Arroyave, 49 N.Y.2d 264). In addition, the defendant did not specify how he would be prejudiced if the trial were not adjourned (see People v. Povio, 284 A.D.2d 1011).
The defendant's contention that his sentencing as a persistent felony offender violated his constitutional rights to notice and a jury trial pursuant to Apprendi v. New Jersey ( 530 U.S. 466) is without merit (see People v. Rosen, 96 N.Y.2d 329, cert denied 122 S.Ct. 224).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.
SMITH, J.P., SCHMIDT, ADAMS and COZIER, JJ., concur.