Opinion
2013-04-26
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. DARRYL P., Defendant–Appellant.
Appeal from an adjudication of the Onondaga County Court (William D. Walsh, J.), rendered November 2, 2009. The adjudication revoked defendant's sentence of probation and imposed a sentence of imprisonment. Frank H. Hiscock Legal Aid Society, Syracuse (Christine M. Cook of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant. William J. Fitzpatrick, District Attorney, Syracuse (James P. Maxwell of Counsel), for Respondent.
Appeal from an adjudication of the Onondaga County Court (William D. Walsh, J.), rendered November 2, 2009. The adjudication revoked defendant's sentence of probation and imposed a sentence of imprisonment.
Frank H. Hiscock Legal Aid Society, Syracuse (Christine M. Cook of Counsel), for Defendant–Appellant. William J. Fitzpatrick, District Attorney, Syracuse (James P. Maxwell of Counsel), for Respondent.
MEMORANDUM:
Defendant was adjudicated a youthful offender based upon his plea of guilty of aggravated criminal contempt (Penal Law § 215.52) and was sentenced to five years of probation. Defendant appeals from an adjudication revoking the sentence of probation and sentencing him to an indeterminate term of 1 to 3 years of incarceration. Contrary to the People's contention, we conclude that this appeal is not moot ( cf. People v. Mackey, 79 A.D.3d 1680, 1681, 913 N.Y.S.2d 622,lv. denied 16 N.Y.3d 860, 923 N.Y.S.2d 422, 947 N.E.2d 1201).
Contrary to defendant's contention, County Court did not abuse its discretion in denying his request for an adjournment ( see People v. Aikey, 94 A.D.3d 1485, 1486, 943 N.Y.S.2d 702,lv. denied 19 N.Y.3d 956, 950 N.Y.S.2d 108, 973 N.E.2d 206). Contrary to defendant's further contention, the determination of the court that he violated the terms of his probation is not against the weight of the evidence ( see People v. Garries, 299 A.D.2d 858, 858, 749 N.Y.S.2d 200,lv. denied99 N.Y.2d 558, 754 N.Y.S.2d 210, 784 N.E.2d 83;see generally People v. Bleakley, 69 N.Y.2d 490, 495, 515 N.Y.S.2d 761, 508 N.E.2d 672).
It is hereby ORDERED that the adjudication so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.