DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that his Sixth Amendment right to a public trial was abridged when the court asked certain members of the defendant's family to leave the courtroom during the first round of jury selection, to permit prospective jurors to be seated. The defendant`s present contentions were not raised before the court and thus are unpreserved for appellate review (see, CPL 470.05; People v. Quezada, 218 A.D.2d 819). In any event, the court providently exercised its discretion in light of the limited seating within the courtroom (see, People v. Valentin, 250 A.D.2d 497).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.