Opinion
June 4, 1998
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Hanophy, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, his statement on direct examination that he "never sold drugs before", opened the door to the prosecutor's inquiry into the facts underlying his prior criminal facilitation conviction ( see, People v. Rodriguez, 85 N.Y.2d 586; People v. Fardan, 82 N.Y.2d 638; People v. Gomez, 227 A.D.2d 210).
The defendant has not preserved for appellate review his contention that the court improperly permitted an undercover police officer to testify who had not been qualified as an expert ( see, People v. Lacend, 216 A.D.2d 112; People v. LeCount, 221 A.D.2d 566; People v. Bailey, 178 A.D.2d 420). In any event, the contention is without merit ( see, People v. Syshawn, 200 A.D.2d 778; People v. Santiago, 222 A.D.2d 461; People v. Graves, 202 A.D.2d 240, affd 85 N.Y.2d 1024).
Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Altman and McGinity, JJ., concur.