Opinion
January 20, 1994
Appeal from the County Court of Schenectady County (Harrigan, J.).
Defendant's convictions stem from his sale of cocaine to an undercover police informant on April 9, 1991. On this appeal, defendant contends that County Court erred by denying his challenge to a juror for cause, by improperly admitting cocaine into evidence and by admitting into evidence a tape recording of the conversation between him and the informant during the drug sale. Identical arguments were advanced regarding these contentions and rejected by this Court in the appeal taken by the codefendant in this case (see, People v Harris, 199 A.D.2d 636). For the reasons set forth in that decision, we likewise reject the same challenges by this defendant.
Defendant also contends that he was deprived of his right to the effective assistance of counsel. While defense counsel's deportment toward his adversary sometimes lacked decorum, we conclude, viewing the record as a whole (see, People v Satterfield, 66 N.Y.2d 796; People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 146-147), that defendant was not deprived of effective assistance of counsel (cf., People v. Trait, 139 A.D.2d 937, lv denied 72 N.Y.2d 867). Defense counsel appeared prepared, made appropriate pretrial motions, effectively cross-examined the People's witnesses and otherwise provided meaningful representation (see, People v. Garcia, 194 A.D.2d 1011; People v. Hope, 190 A.D.2d 958, lv denied 81 N.Y.2d 972).
Mercure, White, Casey and Weiss, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.