OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Term should be affirmed.
Having been. convicted after a jury trial of sexual misconduct, defendant now argues that his right to due process of law was violated when a "rape kit” that included spermatozoa taken from the complainant’s person and underpants was destroyed by the police department property clerk. The "rape
The inadvertent destruction of the "rape kit” provides no basis for a reversal in this case. Defendant was aware of the existence of the "rape kit” some eight months before it was destroyed but never sought its production or expressed an interest in performing independent tests until its destruction was disclosed in the middle of trial. On this record, the only conclusion to be drawn is that defendant forfeited whatever right he had to demand production of the "rape kit” and, consequently, he cannot now complain about the People’s failure to preserve it (see, People v Reed,
Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Simons, Kaye, Alexander, Titone, Hancock, Jr., and Bellacosa concur.
Order affirmed in a memorandum.
