Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
In response to the defendant's Batson challenge ( Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79), the prosecutor responded with a race-neutral reason for exercising a peremptory challenge, thereby shifting the burden to the defendant to prove that the peremptory challenge was used in a racially-discriminatory manner ( see, People v. Payne, 88 N.Y.2d 172). The defendant failed to prove that the reason given by the prosecutor was pretextual and that the prosecutor acted in a racially-discriminatory manner, and the denial of his Batson challenge was proper ( see, Batson v. Kentucky, supra; People v. Payne, supra; People v. Bolton, 239 A.D.2d 511; People v. Wint, 237 A.D.2d 195; People v. Craig, 194 A.D.2d 687).
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 ( see, CPL 470.15 Crim. Proc. [5]).
The trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion by imposing consecutive sentences ( see, People v. Salcedo, 92 N.Y.2d 1019; People v. Yong Yun Lee, 243 A.D.2d 661, affd 92 N.Y.2d 987).
The defendant's remaining contentions, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.
Santucci, J. P., Joy, Altman and Luciano, JJ., concur.