Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant was not denied the effective assistance of counsel due to an alleged conflict of interest. A defendant alleging ineffective assistance of counsel based on a conflict of interest must do more than show that defense counsel had a potential conflict of interest. To prevail, the defendant must establish that the conflict of interest in fact affected the conduct of his defense ( see People v Abar, 99 NY2d 406; People v Smart, 96 NY2d 793; People v Longtin, 92 NY2d 640, 644; People v Alicea, 61 NY2d 23, 31). The defendant failed to do so.
The defendant's contention that he was entitled to a hearing pursuant to CPL 400.21 (5) is unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, is without merit.
The defendant's contention that his sentencing as a persistent violent felony offender violated his constitutional right to a jury trial pursuant to Apprendi v New Jersey ( 530 US 466) is unpreserved for appellate review ( see People v Singh, 35 AD3d 633, 634) and, in any event, is without merit ( see People v Rawlins, 10 NY3d 136, 158; People v Rivera, 5 NY3d 61, 67).