Opinion
November 25, 1991
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Rohl, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's claim that he was not afforded the effective assistance of trial counsel is based upon matters which are dehors the record and, thus, that claim is not reviewable on direct appeal (see, People v. Navedo, 137 A.D.2d 726). The appropriate remedy is a postconviction motion pursuant to CPL 440.10, provided the statutory requirements are met (CPL 440.30). Insofar as we are able to review the ineffective assistance of counsel claim, we find that the defense counsel's performance met the standard of meaningful representation (see, People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137). The defendant's counsel was responsible for negotiating an extremely advantageous plea bargain, substantially limiting the defendant's exposure to imprisonment (see, People v. Navedo, supra; People v. Nicholls, 157 A.D.2d 1004, 1005). Thompson, J.P., Sullivan, Harwood, Miller and O'Brien, JJ., concur.