Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, his trial on the State charges did not constitute double jeopardy because prosecution for those offenses fell within an exception to the bar against a second prosecution ( see, CPL 40.20 [b]; see also, People v Abbamonte, 43 N.Y.2d 74).
The defendant's other contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.
Miller, J.P., Ritter, Santucci and Florio, JJ., concur.