DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's claim that he did not knowingly and voluntarily enter a plea of guilty is unpreserved for appellate review since he never moved to withdraw his plea prior to sentencing or to vacate the judgment of conviction ( see People v. Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662; People v. Claudio, 64 N.Y.2d 858; People v. Randall, 295 A.D.2d 453; People v. Dunkins, 231 A.D.2d 587; People v. Aloisi, 177 A.D.2d 491). In any event, this claim is without merit since the record demonstrates that the defendant's plea was voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently made ( see People v. Fiumefreddo, 82 N.Y.2d 536, 543; People v. Harris, 61 N.Y.2d 9).
Also unpreserved for appellate review is the defendant's challenge to his enhanced sentence since he failed to object to the sentence or move to vacate his plea ( see People v. Howze, 243 A.D.2d 652; People v. Gayle, 224 A.D.2d 710; People v. Ellis, 162 A.D.2d 701).
In any event, the record clearly demonstrates that after the defendant entered his plea, the court expressly warned the defendant that he would face the imposition of an enhanced sentence if he got into any trouble before sentencing or failed to appear on the scheduled sentencing date. Once the defendant failed to appear for the scheduled sentencing date, the court was authorized to unilaterally impose the enhanced sentence ( see People v. Velez, 212 A.D.2d 647; People v. Gayle, supra; People v. Aloisi, supra).
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.
SANTUCCI, J.P., KRAUSMAN, COZIER and MASTRO, JJ., concur.