Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the trial court's rulings during the cross-examination of the People's police witnesses did not deprive him of a fair trial (see, People v. De Jesus, 42 N.Y.2d 519).
The trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in sustaining certain objections which were made by the prosecutor during defense counsel's summation (see, People v Barreau, 183 A.D.2d 904).
The expert testimony of a qualified expert with regard to street-level drug transactions involving several participants neither invaded the jury's province nor bolstered the testimony of the People's eyewitnesses (see, People v. Cronin, 60 N.Y.2d 430; People v. White, 184 A.D.2d 798; People v. Right, 180 A.D.2d 430).
We have considered the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Rosenblatt, J.P., Lawrence, Altman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.