Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that his arrest was the result of police conduct that was so egregious as to have denied him his fundamental rights is without merit. In the first instance, the record does not support his claim that this was the first narcotics sale in which he had ever partaken, and that he was coerced into doing so by the police informant and his next-door neighbor. Rather, it is clear that he knew the sellers and had introduced them to the buyers, and that, in light of the size of the transaction, he had performed such services before (see, People v. Isaacson, 44 N.Y.2d 511, rearg denied 45 N.Y.2d 776). Moreover, there is no evidence that the police investigator's conduct with respect to this sale was repugnant to a sense of justice, illegal or immoral (see, People v. Isaacson, supra). The mere fact that the codefendant was allowed to plead guilty to a lesser charge in return for her testimony at the defendant's trial does not, contrary to the defendant's contentions, evince a desire on the part of the police to obtain a conviction in violation of the defendant's due process rights.
In addition, the defendant's agency defense was properly submitted to the jury, inasmuch as the evidence adduced at trial raised a factual issue as to whether he had been the buyer's agent as opposed to the seller's agent (see, People v. Roche, 45 N.Y.2d 78, cert denied 439 U.S. 958). Moreover, we find that the evidence supported the determination that the defendant had acted as broker and middleman in the transaction. Further, the jury's rejection of the agency defense was not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v. Roche, supra; People v. Argibay, 45 N.Y.2d 45).
The defendant's sentence was not cruel and inhuman treatment. This is not one of those rare cases where the sentencing court may strike down the mandatory sentencing requirements (see, People v. Broadie, 37 N.Y.2d 100, cert denied 423 U.S. 950).
Finally, we have considered the defendant's remaining contention and find it to be without merit. Mangano, J.P., Lawrence, Spatt and Balletta, JJ., concur.