Defendant's contention that the prosecutor improperly elicited implied hearsay testimony is unpreserved for appellate review and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that the testimony provided relevant background information explaining the police officers actions ( see, People v. Li, 238 A.D.2d 277).
Defendant's claim that the court did not meaningfully respond to a jury note regarding whether more than one person could constructively possess the gun recovered from the van in which defendant was seated is also unpreserved for appellate review and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that the court's affirmative response meaningfully answered the jury's inquiry.
Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Tom and Saxe, JJ.