It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him following a jury trial of robbery in the second degree (Penal Law § 160.10). Defendant abandoned his motion seeking dismissal of the indictment based on the alleged denial of his right to a speedy trial pursuant to CPL 30.20 and 30.30 when he proceeded to trial despite the failure of Supreme Court to rule on his motion ( see People v. Sommerville, 6 AD3d 1232, lv denied 3 NY3d 648; People v. Rodriguez, 187 AD2d 291, 292). In addition, he thereby failed to preserve for our review his present contention that the motion should have been granted ( see Sommerville, 6 AD3d at 1232-1233; Rodriguez, 187 AD2d at 292). The evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the People ( see People v. Contes, 60 NY2d 620, 621), is legally sufficient to establish that defendant was an active participant in the robbery ( see People v. Knight, 192 AD2d 676, lv denied 81 NY2d 1075). Also contrary to the contentions of defendant, the verdict is not against the weight of the evidence ( see People v. Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495), and the record establishes that he received meaningful representation ( see People v. Baldi, 54 NY2d 137, 147).