Opinion
December 11, 1997
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Richard Price, J.).
Defendant's speedy trial motion was properly denied. The record supports all determinations of the trial court with respect to the adjournments contested by defendant on appeal, with the exception of the court's exclusion of the five-day adjournment from February 22, 1995 to February 27, 1995. As this five-day adjournment was granted at the request of the People, they should have been charged with an additional five days. However, adding the five additional days to the trial court's determination that 170 days are chargeable to the People, the total chargeable to the People is 175 days, below the statutory limit under CPL 30.30.
The court's Sandoval ruling was an appropriate exercise of discretion.
The court's questioning of the jurors, as a group, regarding an incident involving a discharged alternate juror was suitable under the circumstances, and the court was justified in accepting the jurors' oral responses indicating that their knowledge of the incident would have no effect on their ability to determine this case in a fair and impartial manner ( see, People v. Silvestre, 192 A.D.2d 563, lv denied 82 N.Y.2d 726). The court's denial of defendant's mistrial motion was a proper exercise of discretion.
We perceive no abuse of discretion in sentencing. The record does not support defendant's claim that the court considered improper criteria. We have reviewed defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Milonas, J. P., Rosenberger, Nardelli, Rubin and Tom, JJ.