Opinion
November 28, 1988
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Finnegan, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's claim that he was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel is predicated on matters dehors the record, which are not reviewable on direct appeal (see, People v Robinson, 122 A.D.2d 173, lv denied 68 N.Y.2d 1003; People v Wolcott, 111 A.D.2d 943). The appropriate remedy is a postconviction proceeding pursuant to CPL 440.10 (see, People v Brown, 45 N.Y.2d 852; People v. Wolcott, supra). The defendant's contention that his plea allocution was legally insufficient has not been preserved for appellate review as he neither moved to withdraw his plea of guilty under CPL 220.60 (3) nor moved to vacate the judgment of conviction under CPL 440.10 (see, People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662; People v. Pellegrino, 60 N.Y.2d 636). In any event, a review of the defendant's factual recitation of the crime charged and his responsive answers to questions asked during the plea allocution belie his claim that he did not comprehend English. The record affirmatively demonstrates that the defendant's plea of guilty was neither improvident nor baseless, and that it was knowingly and voluntarily entered with the assistance of counsel (see, People v. Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9). Weinstein, J.P., Bracken, Kunzeman and Rubin, JJ., concur.