Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.
The defendant contends that the trial court should not have accepted his guilty plea on indictment No. 4703/85 without further inquiry into whether he was aware of his potential agency defense and was knowingly waiving it. Although the alleged error was properly preserved for appellate review (see, People v Lopez, 71 N.Y.2d 662, 666; People v. Cooks, 67 N.Y.2d 100, 103, n 1), we find his contention in this regard to be without merit. We do not find that an agency defense was clearly suggested by the defendant's factual recitation. Therefore, the plea allocution did not give rise to a duty on the part of the trial court to inquire further to ensure that the defendant's plea was knowing and voluntary (see, People v. Lopez, supra; People v. Beasley, 25 N.Y.2d 483, 487-488). Moreover, the record demonstrates that the plea allocution satisfied the basic requirements of People v Harris ( 61 N.Y.2d 9). Thompson, J.P., Lawrence, Rubin and Eiber, JJ., concur.