Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The prosecutor sufficiently explained his use of a peremptory challenge to exclude one Black juror during voir dire (see, Batson v Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79; People v Hernandez, 75 N.Y.2d 350, 356-357). The court properly denied defendant's request to charge circumstantial evidence. The People's case was based, in part, upon direct evidence that defendant ordered the codefendant to shoot the victims and that defendant supplied him with the gun (see, People v Gamble, 74 N.Y.2d 904, 906; cf., People v Burke, 62 N.Y.2d 860, 861). The evidence, viewed in the proper light (see, People v Ford, 66 N.Y.2d 428, 437), was legally sufficient to support the verdict and the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495). The court properly admitted evidence that defendant sold drugs to the victims because the relationship among the parties established defendant's motive and intent regarding the crimes charged in the indictment (see, People v Vails, 43 N.Y.2d 364, 368; People v Namer, 309 N.Y. 458, 462; People v Molineux, 168 N.Y. 264, 295). Defendant's Rosario contention (see, People v Rosario, 9 N.Y.2d 286, rearg denied 9 N.Y.2d 908, cert denied 368 U.S. 866, rearg denied 14 N.Y.2d 876, 15 N.Y.2d 765) lacks merit because defendant suffered no prejudice by the delay in producing the police officer's notes (see, People v Ranghelle, 69 N.Y.2d 56; People v Perez, 65 N.Y.2d 154, 159). Defendant's consecutive sentence was proper (see, People v Truesdell, 70 N.Y.2d 809, 811; People v Brathwaite, 63 N.Y.2d 839, 843) and is not excessive. Defendant did not preserve for review his claim that the court erred in denying severance. We have considered defendant's remaining contentions preserved for review and find that each one lacks merit.