DECISION ORDER.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's plea of guilty was knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily entered. The County Court therefore properly denied his motion to withdraw the plea without a hearing, as his conclusory allegations of coercion and ineffective assistance of counsel were contradicted by the record and insufficient to warrant vacatur of the plea ( see People v. Curras, 1 A.D.3d 445; People v. Guerrero, 307 A.D.2d 935, lv denied 1 N.Y.3d 572; People v. Carter, 304 A.D.2d 771; People v. Bedi, 303 A.D.2d 687; People v. Solis, 302 A.D.2d 542).
There is no merit to the defendant's contention that the court erred in failing to conduct a mental competency hearing ( see People v. Pitt, 264 A.D.2d 786; People v. Totman, 269 A.D.2d 617) . "A review of the plea colloquy and sentencing minutes reveals nothing suggesting that [the] defendant was disoriented or unable to understand the proceedings or work with his attorney * * * The mere existence of a notation in the presentence report that [the] defendant, some * * * years earlier, had been diagnosed as suffering from a mental disorder, does not, without more, trigger a duty to inquire further as to his competency" ( People v. Wheeler, 249 A.D.2d 774, 774-775; see also People v. Lyons, 306 A.D.2d 541). In addition, contrary to his contention, the defendant received effective assistance of counsel ( see People v. Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137). The defendant's attorney negotiated an advantageous plea agreement that substantially limited his exposure to imprisonment ( see People v. Pitt, supra at 787).
PRUDENTI, P.J., ALTMAN, LUCIANO and ADAMS, JJ., concur.