People v. FelixPeople v. Felix
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The Supreme Court conducted a sufficient inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea (see People v Tinsley, 35 NY2d 926 [1974]), and providently exercised its discretion in denying that motion (see People v Diaz, 286 AD2d 980 [2001]; People v Dunbar, 260 AD2d 644 [1999]; People v Barnett, 258 AD2d 526 [1999]; People v Bell, 141 AD2d 749 [1988]).
The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit.
Prudenti, P.J., Florio, Cozier and Lifson, JJ., concur.