Judgments affirmed.
It cannot be said that the defendant's constitutional right to a speedy trial was violated, where (1) the delay was not so lengthy as to be violative of his right per se, (2) much of the delay was not within the prosecutor's control, and a reasonable explanation was offered for that period of the delay which was directly caused by the People, (3) the defendant was responsible for some of the delay, and (4) he failed to demonstrate any actual impairment of his defense as a result of the delay (see, People v. Watts, 57 N.Y.2d 299; People v. Taranovich, 37 N.Y.2d 442; People v. Lowry, 107 A.D.2d 716). Therefore, the court properly denied the branch of defendant's motion which was to dismiss the indictments on that basis. Mangano, J.P., Gibbons, Niehoff and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.