Opinion
April 5, 1993
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (G. Goldstein, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The hearing court properly denied the suppression of the gun found in the vehicle occupied by the defendant (see, People v Sanchez, 192 A.D.2d 562 [decided herewith]).
The defendant's contention that he was deprived of his right to counsel by the execution, in the absence of his counsel, of a sentence which had been previously imposed on him, is without merit. The defendant had absconded during trial, and he was sentenced in absentia in the presence of his attorney. When the defendant was returned on a warrant and appeared for the execution of his sentence, his sentence was executed without the presence of his defense counsel, who could not be located. Under these circumstances, the defendant was not deprived of his right to counsel, as the execution of his sentence, as opposed to the imposition of sentence, was not a critical stage of the proceedings (see, People v Harris, 79 N.Y.2d 909; People v Scott, 158 A.D.2d 725).
Furthermore, the defendant's contention that the sentencing court erred in imposing sentence based upon an incomplete presentence report is unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v Thompson, 186 A.D.2d 294; People v Marin, 157 A.D.2d 804). In any event, the defendant cannot now complain that his absence, by virtue of the fact that he had absconded, resulted in the preparation of a less than adequate report (see, People v Thompson, supra; People v Marin, supra).
The defendant's sentence was neither harsh nor excessive (see, People v Delgado, 80 N.Y.2d 780; People v Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Thompson, J.P., Balletta, Miller and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.