The court's Sandoval ruling balanced the appropriate factors and was a proper exercise of discretion, since the prior convictions were probative of defendant's credibility, as were his prior use of aliases and false dates of birth ( see, People v. Walker, 83 N.Y.2d 455).
On the existing record, which defendant has not sought to amplify by way of a CPL article 440 motion whereby matters of strategy could be explained ( see, People v. Love, 57 N.Y.2d 998), we conclude that defendant received meaningful representation ( see, People v. Benevento, 91 N.Y.2d 708, 713-714; People v. Hobot, 84 N.Y.2d 1021, 1024).
We perceive no abuse of sentencing discretion.
Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Williams, Tom, Rubin and Friedman, JJ.