DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment, as amended, is affirmed.
The defendant contends that his plea of guilty should be vacated on the ground that the Supreme Court failed to advise him that he would be subject to an automatic and statutorily-mandated five-year period of post-release supervision following the completion of his determinate sentence (see Penal Law § 70.45). However, this claim is unpreserved for appellate review, as he did not seek to withdraw his plea before sentencing or move to vacate the judgment of conviction (see People v. Wilson, 296 A.D.2d 430, lv denied 99 N.Y.2d 540; People v. Piediscalzo, 287 A.D.2d 582; People v. Gilchrist, 280 A.D.2d 488), and we decline to reach the issue in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction.
The sentence imposed was not excessive (see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
SANTUCCI, J.P., KRAUSMAN, McGINITY, SCHMIDT and CRANE, JJ., concur.