PEOPLE v. ROSA

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The imposition of consecutive sentences was proper since the acts of attempting to rob the four complainants in this case were separate and distinct, although they occurred within a single transaction ( see, People v. Truesdell, 70 N.Y.2d 809, 811; People v. Humphrey, 244 A.D.2d 502; People v. White, 192 A.D.2d 736). Moreover, the sentences imposed are not excessive ( see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).

The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.

Ritter, J.P., Thompson, Goldstein and McGinity, JJ., concur.