Judgment affirmed.
Since defendant failed to timely submit a written motion to dismiss the indictment on the ground that his right to a speedy trial was violated, the motion was properly denied ( see, CPL 30.20, 30.30 Crim. Proc., 210.20 Crim. Proc. [2], 210.45 [1]; People v. Fanelli, 92 A.D.2d 573; People v. Warren, 81 A.D.2d 872). However, this error on the part of defendant's attorney did not, in and of itself, deprive defendant of meaningful representation ( cf. People v. Wagner, 104 A.D.2d 457; People v. Morris, 100 A.D.2d 630, affd 64 N.Y.2d 803; People v. Bonk, 83 A.D.2d 695).
Furthermore, in order to support a conviction for bribery in the second degree, the People need not prove that the accused was aware that the person whom he sought to influence was a public servant ( see, Penal Law § 200.00; cf. People v. Graham, 57 A.D.2d 478, affd 44 N.Y.2d 768).
We have considered defendant's remaining contention and find it to be without merit. Mangano, J.P., Brown, O'Connor and Weinstein, JJ., concur.