Initially, defendant contends that his guilty plea and waiver of the right to appeal were coerced by the ineffective assistance of his counsel and other surrounding circumstances. Although defendant's waiver of the right to appeal does not in and of itself preclude our review (see,People v. Seaberg, 74 N.Y.2d 1), defendant's failure to move to withdraw his guilty plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction renders defendant's arguments unpreserved for our review (see, People v. Smith, 271 A.D.2d 752, 753; People v. Russell, 237 A.D.2d 841, 842, lv denied 90 N.Y.2d 897). Nonetheless, were we to review the arguments, we would find them to be lacking in merit. Our review of the record reveals that defendant knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently pleaded guilty and waived his right to appeal with the benefit of meaningful assistance from his counsel (see, People v. Ireland, 274 A.D.2d 743, 711 N.Y.S.2d 560;People v. Victor, 262 A.D.2d 872, 873, lv denied 94 N.Y.2d 830).

The defendant's plea of guilty resulted in the forfeiture of his right to appellate review of his motion to dismiss the indictment on the ground that he was denied a speedy trial under CPL 30.30 ( see, People v. O'Brien, 56 N.Y.2d 1009). The defendant's remaining arguments are unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, without merit ( see, People v. Russell, 237 A.D.2d 841; People v. Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9; People v. LaCart, 235 A.D.2d 291; People v. Taranovich, 37 N.Y.2d 442). Mangano, P. J., O'Brien, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

On appeal, defendant urges this Court to vacate his plea and reverse the judgment of conviction on the ground that his plea was the product of coercion and was therefore involuntary. Defendant's challenge to the voluntariness of his plea has not, however, been preserved for our review inasmuch as defendant did not move to withdraw his plea or vacate the judgment of conviction ( see, People v. Lesame, 239 A.D.2d 801, 802; People v Russell, 237 A.D.2d 841, lv denied 90 N.Y.2d 897; People v. Perez, 221 A.D.2d 725). Nevertheless, were we to consider the merits of defendant's claim, we would find that defendant's plea was both knowing and voluntary and was not the result of coercion. Before accepting defendant's plea of guilty, County Court engaged in an extensive colloquy wherein it advised defendant of his rights and those he would be forfeiting by his plea.

Defendant now contends on appeal that his plea was not knowing and voluntary as it was obtained by duress. As defendant did not move to withdraw his guilty plea or vacate the judgment of conviction, he has failed to preserve this claim for our review ( see, People v. Russell, 237 A.D.2d 841; People v. Tien, 228 A.D.2d 280, lv denied 88 N.Y.2d 970). In any event, defendant's claim is unavailing. A review of the record indicates that defendant was fully informed of the implications of pleading guilty and he was afforded an opportunity to discuss the matter with his counsel and members of his family.