Crimes - Possession of Weapon - Constitutional Challenge to Firearm Licensing Scheme - Circumstances Where Scheme Would be Valid

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Laura R. Johnson, J.), rendered April 20, 2023, convicting him of criminal possession of a firearm, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant was convicted of criminal possession of a firearm, upon his plea of guilty (Penal Law § 265.01-b [1]). On appeal, the defendant contends that his conviction is unconstitutional in light of New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v Bruen (597 US 1 [2022]).

The defendant's valid waiver of his right to appeal does not preclude review of his facial constitutional challenge (see People v Johnson, — NY3d —, —, 2025 NY Slip Op 06528, *1, *3 [2025]). However, the defendant's contention is unpreserved for appellate review, as the defendant failed to raise a constitutional challenge before the Supreme Court (see People v Cabrera, 41 NY3d 35, 39 [2023]; People v Joyce, 219 AD3d 627, 628 [2023]; see also People v Johnson, — NY3d at —, 2025 NY Slip Op 06528, *2).

In any event, "[t]he party making a facial challenge must establish that a law is unconstitutional in every possible application" (People v Johnson, — NY3d at —, 2025 NY Slip Op 06528, *3). The defendant here "has failed to show that there is no set of circumstances in which the licensing scheme would be constitutionally valid" (People v Johnson, — NY3d at —, 2025 NY Slip Op 06528, *3). Accordingly, the defendant's contention that his conviction was unconstitutional is without merit (see People v Johnson, — NY3d at —, 2025 NY Slip Op 06528, *3; People v Sargeant, 230 AD3d 1341, 1355 [2024], affd — NY3d —, 2025 NY Slip Op 06361 [2025]; People v Li, 226 AD3d 830, 832 [2024]). Iannacci, J.P., Christopher, Landicino and Hom, JJ., concur.