—[*1] Robert S. Dean, Center for Appellate Litigation, New York City (Peter Theis of counsel), for appellant.

Robert M. Morgenthau, District Attorney, New York (Marc Krupnick of counsel), for respondent.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Eduardo Padro, J.), rendered July 29, 2003, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third and fifth degrees, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to an aggregate term of 5½ to 11 years, unanimously affirmed.

The court properly denied defendant's application pursuant to Batson v Kentucky (476 US 79 [1986]). The prosecutor's stated reason for challenging one of the panelists at issue was that the panelist, unlike the other panelists, gave an equivocal answer to a question about his ability to be fair. The record supports the court's finding that this nondiscriminatory reason was not pretextual, and this finding is entitled to great deference (see People v Hernandez, 75 NY2d 350 [1990], affd 500 US 352 [1991]). Defendant's argument with respect to a second panelist is unpreserved (see People v Smocum, 99 NY2d 418, 423-424 [2003]), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would similarly reject it. Concur—Tom, J.P., Friedman, Williams, McGuire and Kavanagh, JJ.