After sufficient inquiry, the court properly denied defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea ( see People v Fiumefreddo, 82 NY2d 536, 543; People v Frederick, 45 NY2d 520). Defendant received a full opportunity to articulate his position, particularly by the means of a written motion. The record of the thorough plea allocution establishes the voluntariness of the plea, and contradicts each of the claims made in defendant's motion. During the allocution, the court recited evidence that established defendant's guilt of every element of first-degree robbery, and defendant admitted the truth of those allegations. The record also establishes that defense counsel provided effective assistance of counsel under the state and federal standards ( see People v Ford, 86 NY2d 397, 404; see also Hill v Lockhart, 474 US 52). Furthermore, there is nothing in the record to cast doubt on defendant's mental competency ( see Pate v Robinson, 383 US 375; People v Tortorici, 92 NY2d 757, cert denied 528 US 834; People v Morgan, 87 NY2d 878).
Defendant's challenge to his second felony offender adjudication is of a type requiring preservation ( see People v Samms, 95 NY2d 52, 56-58), and we decline to review this unpreserved claim in the interest of justice.