Opinion
April 8, 1985
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Grajales, J.).
Judgment, as amended, affirmed.
Defendant's challenge to the sufficiency of the plea allocution is not preserved for appellate review, as a matter of law ( see, CPL 470.05; People v. Hoke, 62 N.Y.2d 1022; People v Pellegrino, 60 N.Y.2d 636). In any event, the allocution satisfied the requirements of People v. Harris ( 61 N.Y.2d 9) and thus vacatur is not warranted ( see, People v. De Santis, 108 A.D.2d 821; People v. Schron, 109 A.D.2d 762).
In addition, we find no merit in defendant's contention that the imposed sentence of 8 to 16 years' imprisonment for his robbery conviction, which was the product of a negotiated plea, was unduly harsh and excessive ( People v. Kazepis, 101 A.D.2d 816; People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
We have also reviewed defendant's contentions raised in his supplemental pro se brief and have found them to be without merit. Mangano, J.P., Brown, Niehoff and Lawrence, JJ., concur.