Opinion
November 14, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Goldman, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Based on our review of the record, we find the defendant's statutory right to a speedy trial was not violated (see, CPL 30.30; People v. Bolden, 81 N.Y.2d 146; People v. Cortes, 80 N.Y.2d 201; People v. Palacios, 79 N.Y.2d 897; People v. Ali, 195 A.D.2d 368, lv denied 82 N.Y.2d 804; People v. Garrett, 171 A.D.2d 153). Further, the court did not err when it denied, on the eve of trial, the defendant's requests for new counsel or to proceed pro se (see, People v. Sides, 75 N.Y.2d 822; People v. Smith, 68 N.Y.2d 737; People v. Davis, 49 N.Y.2d 114; People v. Medina, 44 N.Y.2d 199; People v. McIntyre, 36 N.Y.2d 10; People v. Branch, 155 A.D.2d 473; People v. Moore, 153 A.D.2d 702; People v. Glover, 90 A.D.2d 776).
The defendant's remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Bracken, J.P., Miller, Lawrence and Santucci, JJ., concur.