Crimes - Plea of Guilty - Knowing, Voluntary, and Intelligent

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Christopher Hoefenkrieg, J.), rendered August 17, 2023, convicting him of forcible touching (two counts), upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

Contrary to the defendant's contention, his waiver of the right to appeal was valid (see People v Lopez, 6 NY3d 248, 254, 257 [2006]; People v Stevens, 203 AD3d 958 [2022]). The defendant's valid waiver of the right to appeal precludes appellate review of his challenge to the factual sufficiency of the plea allocution (see People v Prenaj, 239 AD3d 1001 [2025]).

The question of whether the defendant's plea of guilty was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent survived his valid waiver of the right to appeal (see People v Ricottilli, 235 AD3d 1013 [2025]). "Whether a plea is knowing, voluntary, and intelligent depends on the totality of the circumstances," involving an assessment of factors that go beyond any inaccurate statement of a defendant's sentencing exposure to include " 'the nature and terms of the agreement, the reasonableness of the bargain, and the age and experience of the accused' " (People v Scott, 44 NY3d 302, 314 [2025], quoting People v Hidalgo, 91 NY2d 733, 736 [1998]). Under the totality of the circumstances presented here, the defendant's plea of guilty was knowing, voluntary, and intelligent (see People v Drake, 199 AD3d 827 [2021]; People v Principato, 194 AD3d 851 [2021]).

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of conviction. Barros, J.P., Chambers, Christopher and McCormack, JJ., concur.