Judgment affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's claim, the trial court's Sandoval ruling permitting inquiry into the defendant's prior bank robbery conviction did not constitute an abuse of discretion (see, People v. Sandoval, 34 N.Y.2d 371; People v. Van Skiver, 111 A.D.2d 1032; People v. Hall, 99 A.D.2d 843). Also, the defendant's motion to dismiss the indictment on speedy trial grounds (see, CPL 30.30 [a]) was properly denied without a hearing, since it was clear from the defendant's moving papers that a significant portion of the approximately 13-month delay between arrest and trial was excludable, and the defendant failed to establish that there remained a sufficient unexcludable period (see, People v. Lomax, 50 N.Y.2d 351; People v. Jackson, 84 A.D.2d 794). Finally, we find that the defendant's guilt was proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Gibbons, J.P., Brown, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.