Order unanimously reversed, with costs, plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability granted, and matter remitted to Supreme Court, Erie County, for an inquest on damages. Memorandum: Special Term erred by refusing to give collateral estoppel effect to defendant's prior judgment of conviction for assault in the third degree. A criminal conviction may be given collateral estoppel effect in a subsequent civil litigation if there is an identity of issues and a full and fair opportunity to litigate in the first action ( Gilberg v Barbieri, 53 N.Y.2d 285, 291-292; Vavolizza v Krieger, 33 N.Y.2d 351, 356; S.T. Grand, Inc. v City of New York, 32 N.Y.2d 300, 305; Read v Sacco, 49 A.D.2d 471). This is true even though the conviction was entered pursuant to a guilty plea ( Alexander v City of Peekskill, 80 A.D.2d 626; Matter of Cumberland Pharmacy v Blum, 69 A.D.2d 903; Armchair Races v Caso, 51 A.D.2d 565). We reject Special Term's conclusion that plaintiff did not have a full and fair opportunity to litigate the assault charges against him. Unlike the situation in Gilberg ( supra, p. 289), in which the defendant had been charged with harassment, a "petty offense", in the instant case defendant was initially charged with a felony and ultimately pleaded guilty to a class A misdemeanor. Defendant was represented by counsel, and before entering the plea admitted the acts of assault. Some three and one-half months had elapsed between defendant's arraignment and his entry of the plea. Thus, defendant's plea was not a spur of the moment means of disposing of the charges against him, but a deliberate and calculated resolution of serious criminal charges which could have resulted in incarceration.