Opinion
March 1, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Andrias, J.),
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in declining to appoint new counsel (see, People v. Smith, 192 A.D.2d 310, 312, affd 82 N.Y.2d 731). The record indicates that there was a sufficient basis to conclude that defendant's application was frivolous (see, People v. Leach, 169 A.D.2d 569, lv denied 77 N.Y.2d 962). Defendant's contention that counsel was unfamiliar with the case was belied by counsel's detailed cross-examination of an arresting police officer on the previous day. As for defendant's claim that counsel had not informed him of "what I am facing", the trial court itself noted that counsel had done so on numerous occasions in the court's presence, and counsel indicated that he had discussed the pending plea bargain offer with defendant.
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Carro, Wallach and Tom, JJ.