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 two counts of criminal contempt in the second degree (Penal Law § 215.50). Contrary to the contention of defendant, he knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily waived his right to appeal ( see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256; People v Seaberg, 74 NY2d 1, 11). That valid waiver of the right to appeal encompasses defendant's challenge to the factual sufficiency of the plea allocution ( see People v Spikes, 28 AD3d 1101, 1102, lv denied 7 NY3d 818; People v Bland, 27 AD3d 1052, lv denied 6 NY3d 892; People v White, 24 AD3d 1220, lv denied 6 NY3d 820), as well as defendant's challenge to the severity of the sentence ( see Lopez, 6 NY3d at 256; People v Hidalgo, 91 NY2d 733, 737). Although the contention of defendant with respect to the voluntariness of his plea survives his valid waiver of the right to appeal ( see Seaberg, 74 NY2d at 11), defendant failed to preserve that contention for our review ( see People v Collins, 45 AD3d 1472, lv denied 10 NY3d 861; People v DeJesus, 248 AD2d 1023, lv denied 92 NY2d 878), and this case does not fall within the narrow exception to the preservation doctrine ( see People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 666; People v Sharp, 56 AD3d 1230).