Upon reargument, original determination adhered to.
We adhere to our prior determination for the reasons stated in our decision of August 20, 1984. On the record before us, we also reject defendant's claim that the People's tardiness in perfecting their appeal deprived him of Sixth Amendment speedy trial and due process rights (see People v. Cousart, 58 N.Y.2d 62, writ of habeas corpus den sub nom. Cousart v. Hammock, 580 F. Supp. 259, affd 745 F.2d 776; People v. Moore, 100 A.D.2d 521; United States v. Loud Hawk, 741 F.2d 1184, 1194-1196 [Wallace, J., dissenting]; United States v. Bishton, 463 F.2d 887, 890). Defendant could have made a motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of prosecution (CPL 470.60; 22 NYCRR 670.4). Mollen, P.J., Titone, Mangano and Lawrence, JJ.