DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
During jury selection, the defendant objected, pursuant to Batson v. Kentucky ( 476 U.S. 79), to the prosecution's exercise of six peremptory challenges. On appeal, the defendant contends that the court erred in allowing four of those challenges. The prosecution proffered race-neutral reasons for the challenges at issue, thus satisfying its obligation to provide facially-neutral reasons for rejecting the juror (see, People v. Payne, 88 N.Y.2d 172, 181; People v. Allen, 86 N.Y.2d 101, 109-110). Thereafter, the burden shifted to the defendant to demonstrate that the People's explanation was pretextual (see, People v. Allen, supra, at 111; People v. McCargo, 226 A.D.2d 480, 481).
Since the defendant failed to articulate to the Supreme Court any reason why he believed that the prosecutor's explanations were pretextual, his present claims are unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v. West, 243 A.D.2d 590, 591; People v. Morrison, 235 A.D.2d 553, 554; People v. McCargo, supra, at 481; People v. Gooden, 220 A.D.2d 683, 684).
The defendant's sentence was not excessive (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
MANGANO, P.J., BRACKEN, S. MILLER and GOLDSTEIN, JJ., concur.