Defendant's Batson application (Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79) was properly denied. After the prosecutor came forward with race-neutral explanations for the challenges at issue, defendant did not contest any of the prosecutor's explanations. Thus, defendant has failed to preserve this issue for appellate review (see, People v. Allen, 86 N.Y.2d 101, 111), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that the record supports the court's finding that the prosecutor's explanations were not pretextual, a finding entitled to great deference on appeal (see, People v. Hernandez, 75 N.Y.2d 350, affd 500 U.S. 352).
Defendant's request for a justification charge was properly denied. Under the circumstances of this case, viewed in the light most favorable to defendant, we find no reasonable view of the evidence which would support a justification defense (see, People v. Watts, 57 N.Y.2d 299, 301). The evidence clearly established that defendant was the initial aggressor and that the exception contained in Penal Law § 35.15(b) did not apply, that defendant used excessive force, and that defendant was obligated to retreat. As to each of these issues, there was no reasonable view to the contrary.
We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.