The claim that the court erred by requesting that defendant's family leave the courtroom during the first round of voir dire because there was insufficient seating available to accommodate them along with the the jurors is unpreserved since defendant failed to raise it in a timely manner ( People v. Huges, 240 A.D.2d 156; People v. Brown, 188 A.D.2d 540, lv. denied 81 N.Y.2d 882). In any event, were we to review it, we would find defendants claim to be without merit. The trial courts decision to temporarily limit access to the courtroom under the circumstances was a proper act of the courts ""discretion * * * to monitor admittance to the courtroom * * * in order to prevent overcrowding, to accommodate limited seating capacity * * * and generally to preserve order and decorum in the courtroom" ( People v. Colon, 71 N.Y.2d 410, 416, cert denied 487 U.S. 1239; see also, People v. Hughes, supra). We have considered defendants other arguments and find them to be without merit.

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Ellerin, Williams, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.