PEOPLE v. CRUZ

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that the County Court erred in sentencing him as a second felony offender on the ground that his prior felony conviction was jurisdictionally defective ( see People v Quarcini, 4 AD3d 864). The defendant, however, was fully advised of his right to a hearing to controvert the predicate felony statement filed by the People, including the right to challenge the jurisdictional propriety of his prior conviction. "`His failure to object to, or controvert the use of, his prior felony conviction as a predicate felony, or request a hearing thereon, was a waiver of his right to challenge that conviction and its validity'" ( People v Andre, 132 AD2d 560, quoting People v Banks, 117 AD2d 611; see People v Crippa, 245 AD2d 811; People v Shriay, 240 AD2d 783; People v Russell, 234 AD2d 979; People v Barton, 200 AD2d 888; People v Alexander, 176 AD2d 947; People v Ubiles, 130 AD2d 788).