DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment, as amended, is affirmed.
In considering the defendant's speedy trial motion, the Supreme Court should have charged the People with a 13-day period from April 10, 1997, which was a court-imposed deadline to respond to one of the defendant's pretrial motions, to April 23, 1997, the date that the People actually filed a response ( see People v. Gonzalez, 266 A.D.2d 562, 563; People v. Commack, 194 A.D.2d 619, 620). The People also should have been charged with the four-day period from May 8, 1998, when the codefendant, who was incarcerated, was not produced in court, to May 12, 1998, when the defendant made his speedy trial motion ( see People v. Ali, 209 A.D.2d 227). Nevertheless, the record demonstrates that the total amount of time chargeable to the People was less than six months ( see CPL 30.30[a]). Accordingly, the defendant's speedy trial motion was properly denied.
The defendant's argument that he was deprived of his right to counsel at the lineup is unpreserved for appellate review, and, in any event, is without merit ( see People v. Ramos, 99 N.Y.2d 27; People v. Horn, 161 A.D.2d 603). Furthermore, the hearing court properly concluded that the lineup was not unduly suggestive ( see People v. Brock, 293 A.D.2d 294).
As this court previously determined ( see People v. Delosanto, supra at 409), the People committed a Rosario violation ( see People v. Rosario, 9 N.Y.2d 286, cert denied sub nom. Rosario v. New York, 368 U.S. 866; CPL 240.45[a]) by failing to turn over to the defense a copy of the minutes of the Grand Jury testimony of a prosecution witness at the trial. However, there is no reasonable possibility that the nondisclosure materially contributed to the results of the trial. Thus, reversal is not warranted ( see CPL 240.75).
ALTMAN, J.P., S. MILLER, ADAMS and COZIER, JJ., concur.