Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment entered upon a jury verdict convicting him of attempted burglary in the third degree, possession of burglar's tools and criminal mischief in the fourth degree.
Defendant contends that he was denied effective assistance of counsel based on trial counsel's statement prior to trial that he was not prepared on the law or facts relevant to the defense. We disagree. Counsel's statement, without more, does not establish ineffectiveness. In reviewing a claim of ineffectiveness, a court must view the totality of circumstances of a particular case to determine whether a defendant received "meaningful representation" (People v Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147). From our review of the record, defendant was provided meaningful representation (see, e.g., People v Satterfield, 66 N.Y.2d 796). We have considered defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.