Opinion
November 6, 1989
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Hanophy, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the factual recitation of his plea was deficient is not preserved for appellate review (see, People v Pellegrino, 60 N.Y.2d 636). Furthermore, the record establishes that the defendant knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently pleaded guilty with the assistance of competent counsel. There is no indication that the guilty plea was improvident or baseless and, accordingly, it was properly accepted by the court (see, People v Asencio, 143 A.D.2d 917; People v Caban, 131 A.D.2d 863).
Similarly without merit is the defendant's contention that the court improperly imposed a more severe sentence than that promised when the guilty plea was entered. The court clearly and unequivocally conditioned the promised sentence upon the defendant's appearance in court on the scheduled date. The defendant nevertheless failed to appear. His proffered explanations for his failure to appear were vague, unsubstantiated and insufficient (see, People v Asencio, supra). Accordingly, the court properly imposed a more severe sentence, which we note, added a total of only three months to the minimum term originally promised upon the entry of his plea. Mollen, P.J., Lawrence, Kooper, Spatt and Harwood, JJ., concur.