Under these circumstances, we conclude that defendant's guilty plea was knowing, voluntary and intelligent (see People v. Angus, 303 A.D.2d 829, 829-830, lv denied 100 N.Y.2d 536; People v. McDonnell, 302 A.D.2d 619, 619-620, lv denied 100 N.Y.2d 540), and we see no abuse of discretion in County Court's denial of his motion to withdraw the plea (see People v. Kagonyera, 304 A.D.2d 984, 985;People v. Davis, 250 A.D.2d 939, 940). Defendant contends that the second indictment was defective due to the People's failure to meet the CPL 210.20 (6) timeline requirements for seeking a new indictment, a claim that implicates the jurisdictional basis for the indictment and, thus, survives a guilty plea (see People v. Harper, 243 A.D.2d 581, 581). However, the CPL 210.20 (6) requirements do not apply in this case because the first indictment was dismissed pursuant to defendant's CPL 450.50 motion.