Opinion
February 5, 1993
Appeal from the Monroe County Court, Wisner, J.
Present — Callahan, J.P., Boomer, Pine, Boehm and Doerr, JJ.
Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant contends that he was deprived of his right to effective assistance of counsel because his attorney failed to make a motion to suppress physical evidence seized from the apartment of his girlfriend. To prevail, defendant must demonstrate that there was no legitimate explanation for counsel's failure to make the motion (see, People v Garcia, 75 N.Y.2d 973, 974; People v Rivera, 71 N.Y.2d 705, 709). The record establishes that the search was made with the written consent of defendant's girlfriend, who lived in the apartment. Defendant has not shown that there was no legitimate explanation for counsel's failure to make the motion. We further conclude that defendant received meaningful representation at trial (see, People v Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147).
We also reject defendant's contention that the trial court erred in admitting physical items and testimony tending to establish that defendant was engaged in cocaine trafficking. That proof was relevant to and probative of defendant's intent to sell (see, People v Calada, 154 A.D.2d 700, 701, lv denied 75 N.Y.2d 811; see also, Penal Law § 220.16).