Opinion
December 8, 1997
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (McKay, J.).
Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.
The defendant's waiver of his right to appeal forecloses review of his claim that the sentence imposed under Indictment No. 8197/95 was excessive (see, People v. Allen, 82 N.Y.2d 761; People v. Burk, 181 A.D.2d 74; see also, People v. Seaberg, 74 N.Y.2d 1).
Since the defendant was never informed at the plea allocution that the plea was conditioned upon his waiver of his statutory right to seek review of the suppression court's ruling, the defendant did not waive his right to review the denial of that branch of his omnibus motion which was to suppress physical evidence. In any event, the record in this case demonstrates that "the police conduct in this case was justified in its inception and reasonably limited in scope at each step in response to the circumstances presented" (People v. Nelson, 222 A.D.2d 614, 615; People v. Bianchi, 208 A.D.2d 551, affd 85 N.Y.2d 1022; see also, People v. Landy, 59 N.Y.2d 369). Contrary to the defendant's contentions, the identification procedure employed was not improper under the circumstances presented (see, People v. Duuvon, 77 N.Y.2d 541).
O'Brien, J. P., Ritter, Thompson and Joy, JJ., concur.