PEOPLE v. CROWELL

ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant has not preserved for appellate review his claim that his plea allocution was defective since he did not move to withdraw his plea of guilty (see, People v. Bell, 47 N.Y.2d 839; People v. Willingham, 194 A.D.2d 703). This case does not fit within the narrow exception to the preservation doctrine set forth in People v. Lopez ( 71 N.Y.2d 662) and People v. Serrano ( 15 N.Y.2d 304; see, People v. Willingham, supra). Since the plea was part of a knowing and voluntary bargain, we decline to exercise our interest of justice jurisdiction to review the defendant's contention.

The defendant pleaded guilty with the understanding that he would receive the sentence which was thereafter actually imposed. Therefore, he has no basis to now complain that the sentence was excessive (see, People v. Kazepis, 101 A.D.2d 816).