PEOPLE v. GRAY

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant's contention that the testimony of the arresting officer bolstered the undercover officer's identification testimony is unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v West, 56 N.Y.2d 662; People v Chisolm, 174 A.D.2d 629). In any event, the defendant's claim is without merit. The arresting officer testified that after he was given a description of the seller, he went to the scene of the crime, spotted an individual who matched the description, and arrested the defendant. This testimony was a necessary explanation of the events which resulted in the defendant's arrest (see, People v Glover, 191 A.D.2d 582; People v Byrd, 187 A.D.2d 724). Moreover, the arresting officer's testimony that he observed the undercover officer drive by the crime scene after the arrest did not constitute improper bolstering (see, People v Velez, 189 A.D.2d 572; People v Gonzalez, 172 A.D.2d 276). Thompson, J.P., Balletta, Pizzuto and Joy, JJ., concur.