Opinion
December 8, 1997
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Cooperman, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant claims that the trial court's Allen charge (see, People v. Allen, 164 U.S. 492) coerced the jury into returning a verdict and was an insufficient response to a juror's note indicating that she was being pressured by other members of the jury. This argument is unpreserved for appellate review as the defense counsel neither requested a specific charge nor objected to the Allen charge on the specific grounds the defendant now raises (see, People v. Perdomo, 204 A.D.2d 358; People v. Velez, 150 A.D.2d 514, 515). In any event, the defendant's claims are meritless.
The defendant's claim of ineffective counsel is similarly without merit. Viewing the defense counsel's performance in its entirety, in conjunction with the evidence, the law, and the circumstances of the case, the defendant enjoyed meaningful representation at all stages of the trial (see, People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137, 147; see also, People v. Johnson, 184 A.D.2d 732, 733; People v. Blackman, 173 A.D.2d 482, 483; People v. Badia, 159 A.D.2d 577, 579).
The defendant's remaining claims are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.
Bracken, J. P., O'Brien, Thompson and Altman, JJ., concur.