—[*1]Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Knipel, J.), rendered May 1, 2002, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, he was not denied the effective assistance of counsel. Viewing the record as a whole, we conclude that the defendant received meaningful representation (see People v Baldi, 54 NY2d 137 [1981]). The defense counsel presented a reasonable defense, interposed appropriate objections, and effectively cross-examined witnesses (see People v Wright, 8 AD3d 507, 508 [2004]; People v Washington, 5 AD3d 615 [2004]). Unsuccessful trial strategies and tactics do not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel (see People v Henry, 95 NY2d 563, 566 [2000]). Smith, J.P., Crane, Mastro and Skelos, JJ., concur.