PEOPLE v. AMEZQUITA

In this robbery case, the Trial Judge did not abuse his discretion in denying defendant's requests to change counsel as such requests were based on conclusory and unsubstantiated remarks concerning assigned counsel's performance (see, People v Tineo, 64 N.Y.2d 531). Furthermore, defense counsel's failure to make a particular pretrial motion does not, by itself, constitute ineffective assistance of counsel (People v Rivera, 71 N.Y.2d 705, 709). Similarly, the court's imposition of the legal maximum term that defendant could have received for robbery in the second degree did not constitute an abuse of discretion in view of his two prior felony convictions (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).

We have considered defendant's other contentions and find them to be without merit.

Concur — Kupferman, J.P., Sullivan, Milonas, Rosenberger and Wallach, JJ.