DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
Since the defendant neither moved to withdraw his plea of guilty nor moved to vacate his judgment of conviction, his contention that his plea of guilty was not knowing, intelligent, and voluntary because he was not informed that he would be subject to a mandatory period of post-release supervision is not preserved for appellate review ( see People v. Wilson, 296 A.D.2d 430; see also People v. Higgins, 304 A.D.2d 773; People v. Vatore, 303 A.D.2d 607; People v. Curry, 301 A.D.2d 658, lv denied 99 N.Y.2d 653; People v. Velez, 301 A.D.2d 619), and we decline to review it in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.
The defendant's remaining contentions, including those raised in his supplemental pro se brief, either are unpreserved for appellate review or without merit.
FLORIO, J.P., FRIEDMANN, TOWNES and MASTRO, JJ., concur.