Opinion
November 12, 1991
Appeal from the County Court, Nassau County (Harrington, J.).
Ordered that the judgment and the order are affirmed.
The defendant contends, inter alia, that the factual recitation underlying his plea of guilty was deficient, requiring reversal of his judgment of conviction. We disagree. Even assuming that the factual recitation was not complete, reversal of the judgment is unwarranted since the record demonstrates that the plea was knowingly and voluntarily entered with the assistance of counsel, and there is no suggestion that the plea was improvident or baseless (see, People v. Corbin, 175 A.D.2d 171; People v. Duff, 158 A.D.2d 711; People v. Lowe, 150 A.D.2d 801, 802; People v. Caban, 131 A.D.2d 863; see also, People v Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662; People v. Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9, 16-17; People v. Francis, 38 N.Y.2d 150, 155-156). Further, the defendant's motion pursuant to CPL 440.10 was properly denied since the sufficiency of the plea allocution was fully reviewable upon the appeal of the underlying judgment (see, CPL 440.10 [b]; People v. Cooks, 67 N.Y.2d 100, 103; People v. Hill, 161 A.D.2d 893, 894; People v. Benyi, 152 A.D.2d 864, 865).
The sentence imposed is not excessive under the circumstances presented (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
The defendant's remaining contentions, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, are without merit. Bracken, J.P., Harwood, Eiber and O'Brien, JJ., concur.