The court properly exercised its discretion in denying defense counsel's application for a new competency examination for his client, who had recently been found competent by three psychiatrists including a defense psychiatrist (see, People v. Morgan, 87 N.Y.2d 878; People v. Rivera, 241 A.D.2d 301, lv denied 91 N.Y.2d 836). The court properly relied on its own observations of defendant and properly concluded that the strange behavior cited by counsel as the basis for requesting a new examination was a continuation of defendant's established pattern of feigning mental illness.
During trial, the court directed a court officer to advise the jurors about sequestration. Delegation of this minor ministerial matter did not constitute an improper delegation of judicial authority and did not require defendant's presence (see,People v. Bonaparte, 78 N.Y.2d 26, 30-31). The record sufficiently establishes that the court officer's communications with the jury did not involve any substantive instructions (see, People v. Crespo, 267 A.D.2d 36, lv denied 94 N.Y.2d 878; People v. Sarasti, 228 A.D.2d 624, lv denied 88 N.Y.2d 994).
We perceive no basis for reduction of sentence.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.