Crimes - Appeal - Valid Waiver of Right to Appeal

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Raymond Rodriguez, J.), rendered June 30, 2022, convicting him of assault in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The record demonstrates that the defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his right to appeal (see People v Thomas, 34 NY3d 545 [2019]; People v Hendricks, 224 AD3d 705, 705-706 [2024]). Contrary to the defendant's contention, he did not admit his guilt to the offense of which he was convicted until after the Supreme Court had discussed the waiver of the right to appeal with him (see People v Hendricks, 224 AD3d at 706). Generally, "an appeal waiver will encompass any issue that does not involve a right of constitutional dimension going to the very heart of the process, including a defendant's statutory speedy trial claim" (People v Gore, 224 AD3d 848, 848 [2024] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 255 [2006]). "Contrary to the defendant's contention, the enactment of CPL 30.30 (6) does not alter that analysis" (People v Gore, 224 AD3d at 849 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People v Votaw, 190 AD3d 1162, 1164 [2021]).

Accordingly, the defendant's valid waiver of his right to appeal precludes appellate review of his contentions that the Supreme Court should have granted his motions pursuant to CPL 30.30 to dismiss the indictment on the ground that he was denied the statutory right to a speedy trial (see People v Gore, 224 AD3d at 849). Barros, J.P., Warhit, Wan and Hom, JJ., concur.