Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, and a new trial is ordered. No questions of fact have been raised or considered.
The defendant's conviction must be reversed and a new trial ordered because the trial court permitted the alternate jurors to dine with the 12 regular jurors after deliberations had commenced, in violation of CPL 270.30 and 310.10 Crim. Proc. (see, People v Santana, 163 A.D.2d 495, affd 78 N.Y.2d 1027; People v. Rahman, 208 A.D.2d 775). This error is reviewable despite the defendant's failure to object at trial. Errors which "affect the organization of the court or the mode of proceedings prescribed by law" need not be preserved by specific objection, and, even if acceded to, still present a question of law for appellate review (see, People v. Santana, supra; People v. Coons, 75 N.Y.2d 796; People v Rahman, supra). Further, unlike People v. Webb ( 78 N.Y.2d 335) and People v. Bello ( 82 N.Y.2d 862), there was no express consent to this procedure, and under the circumstances of this case, we do not find a waiver.
The defendant's remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review, without merit, or academic. Miller, J.P., O'Brien, Joy and Krausman, JJ., concur.