Opinion
July 11, 1988
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kreindler, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contentions, the court properly denied his request for a Wade hearing. Where, as here, it is uncontradicted that the witnesses knew the defendant "for many years" — as was alleged without dispute in the People's opposition to the defendant's omnibus motion — there is "no identification issue within the purview of CPL 710.30 (1) (b)" (People v. Oglesby, 137 A.D.2d 840, 842, appeal dismissed 72 N.Y.2d 831; People v. Tas, 51 N.Y.2d 915; People v. Gissendanner, 48 N.Y.2d 543).
Moreover, by failing to move in the court of first instance to withdraw his plea, the defendant has failed to preserve for appellate review his present objections to the sufficiency of the plea allocution (see, People v. Pellegrino, 60 N.Y.2d 636; People v. Gonzalez, 110 A.D.2d 909, lv denied 66 N.Y.2d 615; People v Santiago, 100 A.D.2d 857). In any event, the allocution establishes that the defendant voluntarily and intelligently pleaded guilty (see, e.g., People v. Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9; see also, People v. Buckhannon, 108 A.D.2d 818).
Finally, the defendant pleaded guilty with the understanding that he would receive the sentence actually imposed, which we find to be neither harsh nor excessive considering the violent nature of the crime involved (see, e.g., People v. Coolbaugh, 129 A.D.2d 584). Bracken, J.P., Kunzeman, Eiber and Kooper, JJ., concur.