It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of robbery in the first degree (Penal Law § 160.15). We reject the contention of defendant that he was denied the right to effective assistance of counsel when defense counsel took a position adverse to him during Supreme Court's inquiry into his request for substitution of counsel. Defense counsel's "brief defense of [her] own performance, made in response to an inquiry from the court, did not create a prejudicial conflict" ( People v Walton, 14 AD3d 419, 420 [2005], lv denied 5 NY3d 796). Thus, contrary to the contention of defendant, he was not "deprived of his right to conflict-free representation" ( id.). Also contrary to the contention of defendant, the record establishes that he knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily waived his right to appeal ( see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 256). That waiver encompasses defendant's challenge to the severity of the sentence ( see People v Hidalgo, 91 NY2d 733, 737) and, in any event, the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.