Opinion
July 21, 1997
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Roman, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the defendant's application to withdraw his guilty plea based upon his claims of mistake, coercion, and innocence, made at the time of sentencing (see, CPL 220.60). The record establishes that the defendant knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily entered his plea. The defendant's contention that defense counsel failed to advise him that his sentence would run consecutively to another sentence is based upon matters outside the record and thus may not be considered on direct appeal (see, People v. Ramos, 63 N.Y.2d 640; People v. Frederick, 45 N.Y.2d 520, 525; People v. Selikoff, 35 N.Y.2d 227, 244, cert denied 419 U.S. 1122; People v. Hodge, 226 A.D.2d 1124; People v. Dunn, 173 A.D.2d 725).
The defendant's unsupported and conclusory allegation of innocence, made at sentencing, did not warrant the vacatur of his plea (see, People v. McDowell, 198 A.D.2d 236).
Furthermore, the fact that the defendant may have been induced to plead guilty by the People's promise to refrain from further prosecution does not invalidate the plea so long as that promise was fulfilled (see, People v. Winchenbaugh, 120 A.D.2d 811, 813).
Bracken, J. P., O'Brien, Santucci, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.