It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of burglary in the first degree (Penal Law § 140.30). Contrary to the contentions of defendant, we conclude that his waiver of the right to appeal is valid ( see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256), and that it is not void as against public policy ( see People v Carmody, 53 AD3d 1048 , lv denied 11 NY3d 830; see generally People v Muniz, 91 NY2d 570, 573-575; People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273, 280; People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1, 7-10). The further contention of defendant that he was denied effective assistance of counsel survives his guilty plea and valid waiver of the right to appeal only insofar as he contends "`that his plea was infected by the allegedly ineffective assistance and that he entered the plea because of his attorney's poor performance'" ( People v Neal, 56 AD3d 1211; see People v Dean, 48 AD3d 1244, 1245, lv denied 10 NY3d 839; see also People v Petgen, 55 NY2d 529, 534-535, rearg denied 57 NY2d 674). That contention, however, is belied by the statements of defendant during the plea colloquy that he was satisfied with the representation provided by defense counsel ( see People v Farley, 34 AD3d 1229, lv denied 8 NY3d 880; People v Dean, 302 AD2d 951; People v Forshey, 294 AD2d 868, lv denied 98 NY2d 675). We have considered defendant's remaining contentions and conclude that they are without merit.