Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the trial court properly allowed testimony concerning several uncharged drug sales that occurred in close proximity to those for which he was tried. Such evidence was probative, inter alia, of the defendant's identity and intent to sell, and served to complete the narrative of the events leading to his arrest (see, People v Alvino, 71 N.Y.2d 233; People v. Ventimiglia, 62 N.Y.2d 350; People v. Copes, 200 A.D.2d 680; People v. De Jesus, 189 A.D.2d 774; People v. Rodriquez, 181 A.D.2d 750).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.
Bracken, J. P., Ritter, Sullivan and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.