Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The decision to consolidate indictments under CPL 200.20 (4) is committed to the sound discretion of the trial court ( see, People v. Lane, 56 N.Y.2d 1, 8; see also, People v. Matthews, 222 A.D.2d 703). Trial courts should weigh the public interest in avoiding duplicative, lengthy, and expensive trials against the defendant's interest in being protected from unfair disadvantage (see, People v. Lane, supra; People v. Matthews, supra). It cannot be said that the court improvidently exercised its discretion when it consolidated Indictment Nos. 93-00772 and 93-00893.
The court properly denied the defendant's motion for a mistrial based upon the prosecutor's inflammatory comments during the People's opening statement. The comments, while improper, were harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt ( see, People v. Reeder, 221 A.D.2d 666; People v. Rogha, 213 A.D.2d 266).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Rosenblatt, J.P., Ritter, Pizzuto and Altman, JJ., concur.