—[*1]

Appeal from a judgment of the Ontario County Court (James R. Harvey, J.), rendered September 15, 2004. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree.

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

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree (Penal Law § 265.02 [4]). We reject the contention of defendant that County Court abused its discretion in denying his motion at sentencing seeking to withdraw his plea (see CPL 220.60 [3]). The assertion of innocence by defendant in support of the motion is belied by his admission of guilt during the plea colloquy (see People v Viscomi, 286 AD2d 886, 887 [2001], lv denied 97 NY2d 763 [2002]). Even assuming, arguendo, that the motion to withdraw the plea preserved for our review defendant's challenge to the factual sufficiency of the plea allocution, we conclude that defendant's contention is without merit. Defendant admitted during the plea colloquy that, while a passenger in a vehicle, he possessed the components of a firearm and ammunition, and that when assembled, the firearm was operable (see Penal Law § 265.00 [15]; § 265.02 [4]). The sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. Present—Scudder, J.P., Kehoe, Martoche and Green, JJ.