ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant contends that he was denied his statutory right to testify before the Grand Jury. However, by failing to move to dismiss the indictment within five days of his arraignment, the defendant waived that contention (see, CPL 190.50[c]; People v. DiGabriele, 262 A.D.2d 331; People v. Obee, 232 A.D.2d 430, 431; People v. Valle, 198 A.D.2d 459). We find no factual support in the record for the allegation that the five-day limit was extended.
The defendant contends that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel due to defense counsel's failure to make a timely motion pursuant to CPL 190.50. Failure to make such a motion, standing alone, does not constitute the denial of effective assistance of counsel (see, People v. Wiggins, 89 N.Y.2d 872, 873; People v. DiGabriele, supra).
RITTER, J.P., O'BRIEN, CRANE and COZIER, JJ., concur.