Opinion
June 16, 1986
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Naro, J.).
Judgment affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the refusal of the trial court to grant his motion for severance resulted in the denial of his right to confrontation and a fair trial, pursuant to the rule of Bruton v. United States ( 391 U.S. 123), is without merit, since the codefendant's statement interlocked with the defendant's confession, and the jury was given appropriate limiting instructions (see, People v. Cruz, 66 N.Y.2d 61).
We decline to disturb the sentence imposed upon the defendant, as it was within the bounds of both the applicable sentencing statute and the court's sound discretion and we perceive no reason to substitute our discretion for that of the sentencing court (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Weinstein, J.P., Niehoff, Kunzeman and Spatt, JJ., concur.