Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
A reviewing court must give deference to the hearing court's ability to hear and weigh the evidence (see, People v. Prochilo, 41 N.Y.2d 759; People v. Paris, 138 A.D.2d 534) and, when supported by the record, the hearing court's determination should not be disturbed on appeal (see, People v. Quang Ngoc Phan, 198 A.D.2d 309; People v. Garafolo, 44 A.D.2d 86, 88). Here, the hearing court heard testimony from the Trial Judge, the court clerk and the prosecutor, each of whom testified that he believed the stenographic minutes to be in error, and explicitly credited their testimony. Upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the hearing court's determination is not against the weight of the evidence (see, CPL 470.15).
We reject the defendant's contention that he did not receive the effective assistance of counsel at trial since defense counsel's efforts, as a whole, afforded the defendant meaningful representation (see, People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147). Counsel effectively cross-examined witnesses, raised objections, and delivered cogent opening and closing statements that emphasized the defense theory that the defendant was not the person who had fired the shots at the complainant. Thus, taken as a whole, his performance was sufficiently competent to satisfy the defendant's constitutional right to the effective assistance of counsel (see, People v. Marshall, 193 A.D.2d 818, 819; People v. Darty, 177 A.D.2d 587, 588; People v. Baveghems, 137 A.D.2d 822, 823; People v. Morris, 100 A.D.2d 630, affd 64 N.Y.2d 803).
We have considered the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Rosenblatt, J.P., Miller, Ritter and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.