DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's claim that the trial court did not conduct a sufficient inquiry of four allegedly unqualified jurors is unpreserved for appellate review. The defendant did not request such an inquiry, and his two motions for a mistrial failed to specify that any of the jurors was "grossly unqualified to serve" (CPL 270.35; see CPL 470.05; People v. Rodriguez, 71 N.Y.2d 214, 218; People v. Bunch, 278 A.D.2d 501, 502; People v. Beniquez, 267 A.D.2d 316; People v. Jackson, 209 A.D.2d 247, 247-248). In any event, it is clear from the record that at no time did any of the four jurors, including juror number three, express an inability to render an impartial verdict or to deliberate. Therefore, a mistrial and a consequent dismissal were not warranted (cf. People v. Jones, 287 A.D.2d 339; People v. Sipas, 246 A.D.2d 408; People v. Huntley, 237 A.D.2d 533).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 83).
S. MILLER, J.P., KRAUSMAN, GOLDSTEIN and RIVERA, JJ., concur.