THE PEOPLE &C., RESPONDENT, v. JUAN JOSE ENRIQUE, APPELLANT.

    80 N.Y.2d 869, 600 N.E.2d 229, 587 N.Y.S.2d 598 (1992).
    July 7, 1992

   1 No. 141
   Decided July 7, 1992
     _________________________________________________________________

   This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before
   publication in the New York Reports.

   Submitted, for Appellant.
   Jeanne A. Olivo, for Respondent.

   MEMORANDUM:

   The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

   We agree with the Appellate Division, for the reasons stated by
   Justice Sullivan (see, 165 AD2d 13), that the defendant's Sixth
   Amendment rights under the United States Constitution were not
   abridged by the court's ruling that defense counsel could not confer
   with his client during a luncheon recess. Nor do we perceive any basis
   for a different result under the State Constitution.
     _________________________________________________________________

   KAYE, J. (dissenting):

   I disagree that this case, involving a two-hour luncheon recess during
   which defendant was denied all access to counsel, is controlled by
   Perry v Leeke (488 US 272). I would rule that the trial court abused
   its discretion and violated defendant's federal right to counsel.
   Moreover, the trial court's action clearly ran afoul of the greater
   protections afforded by New York's right to counsel clause (NY Const.,
   art I, § 6).

   Accordingly, I would reverse the conviction and order a new trial.

   * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

   Order affirmed in a memorandum. Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges
   Simons, Titone, Hancock and Bellacosa concur. Judge Kaye dissents and
   votes to reverse in an opinion.