Opinion
December 6, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Greenberg, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, the trial court acted within its discretion in determining that the interpreter was competent (see, People v Gordillo, 191 A.D.2d 455; People v Frazier, 159 A.D.2d 278). While defense counsel did point out some discrepancies in the translation, there was no showing of any serious error which would warrant a reversal (see, People v Rolston, 109 A.D.2d 854, 855).
Moreover, the defendant was not denied the effective assistance of trial counsel since the record establishes that counsel provided him with meaningful representation (see, People v Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 146; People v Badia, 159 A.D.2d 577).
We have examined the defendant's contention that the sentence was excessive and find it to be without merit (see, People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Thompson, J.P., Bracken, Balletta and Santucci, JJ., concur.