Defendant's constitutional speedy trial motion was properly denied. Although labeled as a motion to dismiss the indictment on the ground of, inter alia, constitutional violations of defendant's right to a speedy trial, the motion failed to address the constitutional issues ( see, People v Lomax, 50 NY2d 351). Defendant failed to preserve his present claims, and failed to develop a factual record sufficient to establish the merits of such claims ( People v Charleston, 54 NY2d 622). In any event, were this Court to review the constitutional issue on the present record, we would find it to be without merit ( People v Taranovich, 37 NY2d 442).