Majority
Judgment, Supreme
The motion court properly denied defendant’s statutory speedy trial motion without conducting a hearing, because the allegations in defendant’s motion papers did not set forth a legal basis for the motion. We note that defendant’s related claims involving alleged ineffective assistance of counsel were not explored in the context of a CPL 440.10 motion (see, People v Love, 57 NY2d 998 , 1000). In any event, the existing record does not indicate that an additional speedy trial motion, had it been filed, would have been successful, and since defendant’s counsel obtained a favorable plea bargain in this case, it cannot be concluded that defendant was denied effective assistance of counsel (People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137 ). Concur—Murphy, P. J., Sullivan, Rosenberger, Williams and Andrias, JJ.
Cases cited
- People v. Love 57 NY2d 998 at 1000 p. 269
- People v. Baldi 54 NY2d 137 p. 269