Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: County Court, after balancing the factors to be considered on a motion to dismiss the indictment for violation of defendant's constitutional right to a speedy trial (see, People v Taranovich, 37 N.Y.2d 442), properly denied the motion. We agree with the analysis of County Court and note particularly that defendant failed to show that his defense had been impaired by the delay.
The court properly denied defendant's motion to suppress the statement that he made to the police. The testimony at the suppression hearing shows that, although defendant had been drinking, he was not so intoxicated that he could not "appreciate the nature and consequences of his statements" (People v Schompert, 19 N.Y.2d 300, 305, cert denied 389 U.S. 874).
Under the circumstances, the sentencing of defendant to consecutive terms of imprisonment was neither illegal (see, People v Simmons, 155 A.D.2d 893 [decided herewith]) nor harsh and excessive.
We have considered the issues raised by defendant in his pro se brief and we find them to be without merit.