By pleading guilty, defendant waived his challenge to the sufficiency of the grand jury evidence supporting the second count of the indictment (see People v Hansen, 95 N.Y.2d 227, 232 [2000]; People v Dunbar, 53 N.Y.2d 868, 871 [1981]; People v Snype, 171 A.D.3d 1220, 1220-1221 [2d Dept 2019]; People v Carston, 163 A.D.3d 1166, 1167 [3d Dept 2018], lv denied 32 N.Y.3d 1002 [2018]; People v Melendez, 48 A.D.3d 960, 960 [3d Dept 2008], lv denied 10 N.Y.3d 962 [2008]). Finally, defendant's contention that County Court lacked geographical jurisdiction under CPL 20.40 is raised for the first time on appeal and is not preserved for appellate review (see People v Greenberg, 89 N.Y.2d 553, 556 [1997]; People v McLaughlin, 80 N.Y.2d 466, 471 [1992]; People v Roulhac, 166 A.D.3d 1066, 1068 [3d Dept 2018], lv denied 32 N.Y.3d 1128 [2018]; People v Hinds, 77 A.D.3d 429, 430 [1st Dept 2010], lvs denied 15 N.Y.3d 953, 15 N.Y.3d 955 [2010]), and we decline to exercise our interest of justice jurisdiction to reverse on this basis (cf. Matter of Steingut v Gold, 42 N.Y.2d 311, 313-316 [1977]; Matter of Gentner v Hall, 193 A.D.3d 1129, 1131-1132 [3d Dept 2021]; People v Maldonado, 122 A.D.3d 1379, 1379-1380 [4th Dept 2014], lv denied 27 N.Y.3d 1002 [2016];
By pleading guilty, defendant waived his challenge to the sufficiency of the grand jury evidence supporting the second count of the indictment (seePeople v. Hansen, 95 N.Y.2d 227, 232, 715 N.Y.S.2d 369, 738 N.E.2d 773 [2000] ; People v. Dunbar, 53 N.Y.2d 868, 871, 440 N.Y.S.2d 613, 423 N.E.2d 36 [1981] ; People v. Snype, 171 A.D.3d 1220, 1220–1221, 96 N.Y.S.3d 872 [2d Dept. 2019] ; People v. Carston, 163 A.D.3d 1166, 1167, 80 N.Y.S.3d 724 [3d Dept. 2018], lv denied 32 N.Y.3d 1002, 86 N.Y.S.3d 760, 111 N.E.3d 1116 [2018] ; People v. Melendez, 48 A.D.3d 960, 960, 852 N.Y.S.2d 440 [3d Dept. 2008], lv denied 10 N.Y.3d 962, 863 N.Y.S.2d 146, 893 N.E.2d 452 [2008] ). Finally, defendant's contention that County Court lacked geographical jurisdiction under CPL 20.40 is raised for the first time on appeal and is not preserved for appellate review (seePeople v. Greenberg, 89 N.Y.2d 553, 556, 656 N.Y.S.2d 192, 678 N.E.2d 878 [1997] ; People v. McLaughlin, 80 N.Y.2d 466, 471, 591 N.Y.S.2d 966, 606 N.E.2d 1357 [1992] ; People v. Roulhac, 166 A.D.3d 1066, 1068, 86 N.Y.S.3d 336 [3d Dept. 2018], lv denied 32 N.Y.3d 1128, 93 N.Y.S.3d 266, 117 N.E.3d 825 [2018] ; People v. Hinds, 77 A.D.3d 429, 430, 908 N.Y.S.2d 397 [1st Dept. 2010], lvs denied 15 N.Y.3d 953, 917 N.Y.S.2d 113, 942 N.E.2d 324 [2010] ), and we decline to exercise our interest of justice jurisdicti