People v. Wimes

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant failed to preserve for our review his claim that he was denied his constitutional right to a speedy trial. He failed to move to dismiss the indictment on speedy trial grounds or to object to the claimed unreasonable delay in completing the nonjury trial and rendering a verdict (see, CPL 470.05 [2]; see also, People v Woodley, 141 AD2d 587, 588). Were we to address this issue in the interest of justice, we would conclude that defendant’s right to a speedy trial was not violated (see, People v Taranovich, 37 NY2d 442, 445). The delay between…