PEOPLE v. TINSLEY

Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.

The defendant failed to preserve his contention that his pleas of guilty were invalid ( see People v Clarke, 93 NY2d 904, 905; People v Pellegrino, 60 NY2d 636, 637; People v Thomas, 262 AD2d 588, 589). In any event, the record demonstrates that the defendant's pleas of guilty were knowing, voluntary, and intelligent ( see People v Fiumefreddo, 82 NY2d 536, 543 T1993]; People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 666; People v Harris, 61 NY2d 9, 17).

The defendant's contention that, in light of his assertions of innocence in the presentence investigation report, the court should have conducted a further inquiry before imposing sentence is unpreserved for appellate review ( see People v Pellegrino, supra; People v Steed, 133 AD2d 433, 434). In any event, the defendant's post-plea assertions of innocence do not warrant vacating his pleas ( see People v Dixon, 29 NY2d 55, 57; People v Eaton, 14 AD3d 577; People v Richardson, 13 AD3d 561).

Based on this record, defense counsel's statements at sentencing did not amount to ineffective assistance of counsel ( cf. People v Caple, 279 AD2d 635).