PEOPLE v. MARCHAND

Upon reargument the original determination of this court is adhered to.

Defendant's contention regarding his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel due to his counsel's failure to arrange for defendant to appear and testify before the Grand Jury cannot be determined on the record before us and "would be more properly raised in a postjudgment motion made pursuant to CPL 440.10, at which time additional background facts could be developed (see People v Love, 57 N.Y.2d 998; People v Brown, 45 N.Y.2d 852)" ( People v Leonard, 102 A.D.2d 857).

We have considered the other contentions raised upon reargument and have found them to be without merit. Titone, J.P., Weinstein, Niehoff and Rubin, JJ., concur.