People v. JeromePeople v. Jerome
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant’s claim that his plea was not knowing, voluntary, and intelligent is not preserved for appellate review inasmuch as he did not move to withdraw his plea (see CPL 220.60 [3]; People v Henandez-Bautista,
The defendant asserts that the Court erred in imposing restitution as part of the sentence, and requests that the restitution component of the sentence be vacated. The defendant’s contentions are unpreserved for appellate review (see People v Thompson,