Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the court should have conducted, at the plea allocution, an inquiry of the defendant concerning the possible defense of mental disease or defect, is without merit, since nothing in the record indicated that the defendant may have been mentally ill when he committed the instant crime (see generally, People v Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662). Likewise, the defendant's contention that he did not receive the effective assistance of counsel is without merit, since the defendant received meaningful representation from his defense counsel. Counsel actively and competently participated in the plea and sentencing proceedings (see, People v Baldi, 54 N.Y.2d 137).
The defendant also contends that his sentence was excessive. However, since the defendant pleaded guilty with the understanding that he would receive the sentence which was thereafter imposed, the defendant has no basis to now complain that his sentence was excessive (see, People v Kazepis, 101 A.D.2d 816). Thompson, J.P., Lawrence, Miller, O'Brien and Ritter, JJ., concur.