Opinion
December 24, 1984
Appeal from the County Court, Westchester County (Cowhey, J., McMahon, J.).
Judgment affirmed.
Defendant contends that his application to suppress identification testimony should not have been denied without a Wade hearing. However, his supporting papers failed to allege any facts in support of the motion, and, thus, summary denial was proper (CPL 710.60, subds 1, 3, par [b]; People v. Wicker, 72 A.D.2d 611; People v. Roberto H., 67 A.D.2d 549). Defendant further argues that he should be relieved of his guilty plea because of the court's failure to (1) fully advise him of the rights he waived by that plea, and (2) make further inquiries upon his statements at sentencing. By failing to apply to the court of first instance to withdraw his plea or to vacate the judgment of conviction, the defendant has not preserved any issue of law as to the sufficiency of the plea allocution ( People v. Pellegrino, 60 N.Y.2d 636; People v. Warren, 47 N.Y.2d 740; People v. Mattocks, 100 A.D.2d 944). Moreover, the record discloses that the allocution was sufficient ( People v. Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9; People v. Nixon, 21 N.Y.2d 338, cert den sub nom. Robinson v. New York, 393 U.S. 1067).
We have examined defendant's remaining contention and find it to be without merit. O'Connor, J.P., Brown, Lawrence and Eiber, JJ., concur.