DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant maintains that the court erred in admitting testimony regarding uncharged crimes allegedly committed by him. However, because he failed to raise an objection during the challenged portions of the testimony, this claim is unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Berrios, 71 N.Y.2d 905, 906; People v. Duffy, 265 A.D.2d 568).
In any event, this contention is without merit. Evidence of uncharged criminal conduct is inadmissible if introduced solely to establish the defendant's criminal propensities (see, People v. Alvino, 71 N.Y.2d 233, 241). However, such evidence is admissible to provide relevant background information and to complete a witness's narrative to assist the jury in its comprehension of the crime charged (see, People v. Montanez, 41 N.Y.2d 53, 58; People v. Dodson, 243 A.D.2d 644, 645).
Here, the testimony regarding the procurement of the search warrants was properly admitted to supply the jury with background information establishing the basis for the police officers' actions in obtaining the search warrants. Moreover, the testimony was properly admitted to complete the narrative of events leading to the defendant's arrest (see, People v. Waite, 183 A.D.2d 796, 797).
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.
LUCIANO, J.P., TOWNES, CRANE and PRUDENTI, JJ., concur.