Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the record in this case does not demonstrate that a Batson violation occurred during jury selection ( see, Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79). In his attempt to establish the requisite prima facie showing ( see, People v. Childress, 81 N.Y.2d 263), the defendant relied solely on the number of Hispanic jurors challenged. It is incumbent upon the party mounting a Batson challenge to "articulate and develop all of the grounds supporting the claim, both factual and legal, during the colloquy in which the objection is raised and discussed" ( People v. Vidal, 212 A.D.2d 553, 554). In the absence of a record demonstrating other facts or circumstances supporting a prima facie case, we find that the defendant failed to establish a pattern of purposeful exclusion sufficient to raise an inference of discrimination ( see, People v. Jenkins, 84 N.Y.2d 1001; People v. Morla, 245 A.D.2d 468; People v. Vidal, supra).
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. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence (CPU 470.15 [5]).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.
S. Miller, J. P., Florio, McGinity and Luciano, JJ., concur.