Opinion
October 10, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Mary McGowan Davis, J.).
Defendant's claim that this Court should have granted his motion to enlarge the record to include the minutes of his Grand Jury testimony, in order to show that his attorney was ineffective for having permitted him to continue testifying after he told the Grand Jury that he was having psychiatric problems, is without merit. The Grand Jury minutes defendant would have us consider would not disclose counsel's specific reasons for continuing with defendant's testimony, and, in the absence of such disclosure, it could not be said that there were no strategic or other legitimate explanations for taking this tack ( see, People v. Rivera, 71 N.Y.2d 705, 709). The relief defendant seeks — a new trial on the ground of ineffective assistance of counsel — can be better pursued in a postjudgment motion pursuant to CPL 440.10 in which an appropriate factual record might be developed ( see, People v. Love, 57 N.Y.2d 998, 1000; People v Brown, 45 N.Y.2d 852, 853-854).
Concur — Ellerin, J.P., Wallach, Ross, Asch and Mazzarelli, JJ.