Timothy P. Donaher, Public Defender, Rochester (Benjamin L. Nelson of counsel), for defendant-appellant.

Sandra Doorley, District Attorney, Rochester (Derek Harnsberger of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (Vincent M. Dinolfo, J.), rendered December 10, 2015. The judgment convicted defendant, upon a plea of guilty, of manslaughter in the first degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of manslaughter in the first degree (Penal Law § 125.20 [1]), defendant contends that County Court erred in granting the People's motion for a pretrial protective order concerning the identity of certain prosecution witnesses. By pleading guilty, however, defendant forfeited that contention because "the forfeiture occasioned by a guilty plea extends to claims premised upon, inter alia, . . . motions relating to discovery," such as the People's motion for a protective order here (People v Gerber, 182 AD2d 252, 260 [2d Dept 1992], lv denied 80 NY2d 1026 [1992]; see People v Perry, 50 AD3d 1244, 1245 [3d Dept 2008], lv denied 10 NY3d 963 [2008]; People v Oliveri, 49 AD3d 1208, 1209 [4th Dept 2008]). Our ruling in People v Wilson (159 AD3d 1600, 1601 [4th Dept 2018]) is limited to alleged Brady violations and, given the absence of a Brady claim in this case, has no applicability here. Defendant's related argument that his guilty plea was coerced "because of the restrictions imposed by [the] protective order[ ] . . . is belied by the record, which reveals that [he] acknowledged under oath that nobody was forcing, threatening, or coercing him to plead guilty, and that he was entering the plea[ ]" in order to serve his best interests (People v Weston, 145 AD3d 746, 747 [2d Dept 2016], lv denied 29 NY3d 1088 [2017]). Present—Centra, J.P., NeMoyer, Curran, Winslow and Bannister, JJ.