Opinion
March 11, 1985
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rotker, J.).
Judgment affirmed.
Upon a review of the record we find that defendant's plea of guilty was knowingly and intelligently made ( see, People v Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9, 18-19; People v. Modica, 100 A.D.2d 559, mod on other grounds 64 N.Y.2d 828) and that it was not the product of coercion ( People v. Lowrance, 41 N.Y.2d 303; People v. Modica, supra). It is clear that defendant, a second felony offender, is criminally experienced and "knowing and knowledgeable in the ways of the criminal law" ( People v. Pearson, 55 A.D.2d 685, 686; see also, People v. Nixon, 21 N.Y.2d 338, 353, cert denied sub nom. Robinson v. New York, 393 U.S. 1067).
Moreover, there is no merit to defendant's challenge to the constitutionality of Penal Law § 70.06, the second felony offender statute. This court has repeatedly stated that the mandatory sentencing scheme under that statute does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment ( see, People v. Vasquez, 104 A.D.2d 1012; People v. Cates, 104 A.D.2d 895; People v. Bryant, 47 A.D.2d 51).
Finally, we have reviewed defendant's other contentions, and find them to be without merit. O'Connor, J.P., Rubin, Lawrence and Eiber, JJ., concur.