Opinion
November 5, 1990
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Goldstein, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
We decline to review the denial of the defendant's suppression motion since the record reveals that, as part of his negotiated plea bargain, the defendant knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to seek appellate review thereof (see, People v. Williams, 36 N.Y.2d 829, cert. denied 423 U.S. 873; People v. Seaberg, 74 N.Y.2d 1; People v. Boyle, 164 A.D.2d 938).
The defendant's contentions with respect to the voluntariness of his plea have not been preserved for appellate review as he neither moved to withdraw his plea under CPL 220.60 (3) nor sought to vacate the judgment of conviction under CPL 440.10 (see, People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 665; People v. Rivera, 143 A.D.2d 783; People v. Pellegrino, 60 N.Y.2d 636). In any event, a review of the record reveals that the defendant's plea was knowingly and voluntarily entered with the assistance of counsel (see, People v. Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9). Furthermore, by pleading to a lesser crime in full satisfaction of that charged in the indictment, the defendant forfeited the right to challenge the factual basis of the plea (see, People v. Pelchat, 62 N.Y.2d 97, 108; People v. Adams, 57 N.Y.2d 1035; People v. Rivera, supra; People v. Caban, 131 A.D.2d 863).
Finally, the record reveals that the People complied with CPL 400.15 (2) in serving the prior violent felony offender statement. Brown, J.P., Lawrence, Kunzeman and Kooper, JJ., concur.