Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that his waiver of the right to appeal was not knowingly, voluntarily, or intelligently made is without merit ( see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256; People v Moissett, 76 NY2d 909, 911). Further, the defendant's valid waiver of his right to appeal precludes review of his challenge to the sentence as excessive ( see People v Hidalgo, 91 NY2d 733, 737; People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273, 281; People v Pertillar, 37 AD3d 740). "The defendant's valid waiver encompasses the challenge to the legality of the procedure utilized in sentencing him as a second felony offender" ( People v Backus, 43 AD3d 409, 410, citing People v Callahan, 80 NY2d 273).
The defendant's remaining contention is unpreserved for appellate review ( see CPL 470.05), and we decline to review it in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction ( see CPL 470.15 [a]).