Opinion
February 5, 1991
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Jay Gold, J.).
Upon our prior consideration of this case ( 152 A.D.2d 481), we held the appeal in abeyance and remanded for a hearing on defendant's coram nobis motion as to whether his trial attorney failed to pursue plea-bargaining negotiations or convey to defendant the results thereof and whether counsel failed to investigate the defense that five witnesses, arrested with defendant, would have exonerated him.
The IAS court conducted the hearing on September 8 and September 15, 1989. Upon consideration of the testimony given by defendant and his trial attorney and of the records maintained by the District Attorney, the court determined that defendant's counsel actively pursued plea negotiations and attempted, albeit unsuccessfully, to locate the five potential witnesses.
The coram nobis motion was appropriately denied and, accordingly, defendant's conviction and the denial of his CPL 440.10 motion are affirmed.
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Milonas, Rosenberger, Ellerin and Rubin, JJ.