Defendant was not denied his right to be present at material stages of the trial, since the bench conference at issue involved only a discussion of legal matters (People v. Rodriguez, 85 N.Y.2d 586, 591). In any event, the record establishes that defendant knowingly and voluntarily waived his presence at the sidebar (see, People v. Spotford, 85 N.Y.2d 593, 597-598), notwithstanding his objection to the court's reasonable security procedures (see, People v. Vargas, 88 N.Y.2d 363, 376-377; People v. Bostic, 230 A.D.2d 804, 805, lv denied 89 N.Y.2d 919).
The court properly admitted evidence of an uncharged sale since it occurred contemporaneously with the charged sales and was relevant to whether defendant possessed the cocaine with intent to sell (People v. Abrams, 227 A.D.2d 293, lv denied 88 N.Y.2d 979). Moreover, this evidence was relevant for narrative purposes and to explain why the police officer's attention was focused on defendant (supra; People v. Pressley, 216 A.D.2d 202, lv denied 86 N.Y.2d 800).
We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion.
We have considered defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Williams and Tom, JJ.