Opinion
January 17, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lipp, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel because his counsel failed to impeach a witnesses's identification testimony, which was inconsistent and inaccurate. The defendant also finds fault with his counsel's failure to attack the credibility of four eyewitnesses on the ground that they were either friends or relatives of the victims. To prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, the defendant must demonstrate that he was deprived of a fair trial because he received less than meaningful representation (see, People v. Flores, 84 N.Y.2d 184, 187). The defendant's contentions are unsupported by the record. Indeed, the record shows that the defendant's counsel focused his cross-examination of the People's witnesses and his summation on the identification issue and explored the possibility of collaboration among the witnesses because of their familiarity with each other and with the victims. Accordingly, the defendant received meaningful representation (see, People v. Flores, supra; People v. Badia, 159 A.D.2d 577, 578).
The sentence was not excessive (see, People v. Henry, 116 A.D.2d 737, 738).
We have considered the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Rosenblatt, J.P., Altman, Friedmann and Florio, JJ., concur.