Opinion
November 18, 1991
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Chetta, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's guilty plea forfeited his claim that his rights under CPL 30.30 had been violated (see, People v. O'Brien, 56 N.Y.2d 1009, 1010; People v. Sharcoff, 137 A.D.2d 567). Further, the defendant's motion to vacate the plea was properly denied without a hearing. Contrary to the contentions made in support of that motion, the defendant's attorney had represented him effectively at a suppression hearing and secured a generous sentence promise. At the plea allocution, the defendant acknowledged his guilt and the significance of the plea, and showed no signs of distress or coercion (see, People v. Stubbs, 110 A.D.2d 725).
Turning to the suppression ruling, we note that the showups challenged by the defendant were not unduly suggestive, were conducted shortly after the crime, and provided a prompt determination that the defendant was the suspect described by the witnesses (see, People v. Duuvon, 77 N.Y.2d 541; People v Henley, 145 A.D.2d 570). Kunzeman, J.P., Sullivan, Lawrence and Balletta, JJ., concur.