Opinion
February 7, 1995
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Carol Berkman, J.).
Defendant failed to preserve for appellate review the issue that he lacked the capacity to enter a knowing and intelligent guilty plea by failing to move either to withdraw his pleas under CPL 220.60 (3), or to vacate the judgment of conviction pursuant to CPL 440.10 (People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 665). Were we to review this claim in the interest of justice, we would find it meritless because the totality of the circumstances shows that the defendant, while represented by counsel, knowingly entered his pleas (see, People v. Fiumefreddo, 82 N.Y.2d 536, 546), and there was no indication that defendant was incompetent (see, People v. Mayfield, 208 A.D.2d 391).
Similarly, defendant failed to preserve for appellate review the claim that his plea allocution was insufficient to sustain his conviction for burglary, second degree (People v. Lopez, supra). Nor would we reverse in the interest of justice. Defendant acknowledged the facts underlying the crimes, and once having admitted the truth of the allegations, he need not recite all of the elements of the crime (see, People v. Galvan, 197 A.D.2d 394).
Finally defendant's sentence was not excessive considering his prior criminal record and the favorable negotiated plea agreement he bargained for.
Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Rosenberger and Ross, JJ.