Opinion
February 1, 1988
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Rader, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The record of the plea proceedings indicates that in return for the bargained-for plea, the defendant voluntarily and expressly waived his right to raise on appeal any question with respect to the admissibility of his confession and certain physical evidence. Accordingly, the defendant's arguments on these issues must be rejected (see, People v Williams, 36 N.Y.2d 829, cert denied 423 U.S. 873).
We have reviewed defendant's remaining arguments and find them to be unpreserved for appellate review, and in any event, without merit (see, People v Pellegrino, 60 N.Y.2d 636; People v Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9; People v Lowrance, 41 N.Y.2d 303; People v Serrano, 15 N.Y.2d 304; People v Martinez, 127 A.D.2d 855; People v Barton, 103 A.D.2d 750; Strickland v Washington, 466 U.S. 668, reh denied 467 U.S. 1267; People v Kazepis, 101 A.D.2d 816; People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Mangano, J.P., Brown, Rubin and Harwood, JJ., concur.