Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
We do not agree with the defendant's argument that the People deliberately delayed his trial in order to hamper his defense or to gain a tactical advantage. Much of the approximately 14-1/2 month delay which occurred between the time of the defendant's arraignment on July 30, 1991, and his plea of guilty on October 15, 1992, is attributable to various applications made by the defendant or his codefendant. There is no competent proof that the defense was prejudiced by this delay. Considering the factors outlined in People v. Taranovich ( 37 N.Y.2d 442, 445), we conclude that the defendant was not deprived of his constitutional right to a speedy trial (see also, People v. Watts, 57 N.Y.2d 299; People v. Suarez, 55 N.Y.2d 940; People v. Rosado, 166 A.D.2d 544; People v. Moore, 159 A.D.2d 521; People v. Geller, 65 A.D.2d 774).
There being no other issue reviewable on this appeal, in light of the defendant's plea of guilty and his waiver of his right to appeal (see, People v. Callahan, 80 N.Y.2d 273; People v. Sutton, 80 N.Y.2d 273), the judgment is affirmed. Bracken, J.P., Balletta, Copertino and Hart, JJ., concur.