DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant did not preserve for appellate review his contention that the People failed to disprove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was acting as an agent of the undercover officer in the narcotics transaction (see, CPL 470.05[2]; People v. Stahl, 53 N.Y.2d 1048 ; People v. Tallarine, 223 A.D.2d 738 ). In any event, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution (see, People v. Contes, 60 N.Y.2d 620 ), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant' s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. There was sufficient evidence from which the jury could reasonably conclude that the defendant was a "streetwise peddler" ready to enter into a drug sale (see, People v. Leybovich, 201 A.D.2d 670 ;People v. Overton, 168 A.D.2d 575 ).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.
RITTER, J.P., ALTMAN, KRAUSMAN, and McGINITY, JJ., concur.