Opinion
2021–09568 Ind. No. 10064/20
07-05-2023
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Curtis T. HOLLAND, appellant.
Law Office of Kelley M. Enderley, P.C., Poughkeepsie, NY, for appellant. William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, NY (Amie M. Johnson of counsel), for respondent.
Law Office of Kelley M. Enderley, P.C., Poughkeepsie, NY, for appellant.
William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, NY (Amie M. Johnson of counsel), for respondent.
HECTOR D. LASALLE, P.J., FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, LARA J. GENOVESI, HELEN VOUTSINAS, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Jessica Segal, J.), rendered December 14, 2021, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed.
On appeal, the defendant contends that the County Court did not have a sufficient basis on which to impose an enhanced sentence. Contrary to the People's contention, this claim is not precluded by his waiver of the right to appeal (see People v. Carson, 213 A.D.3d 690, 691, 182 N.Y.S.3d 250 ; People v. Smith, 160 A.D.3d 664, 665, 73 N.Y.S.3d 600 ; People v. Gregory, 140 A.D.3d 1088, 1089, 33 N.Y.S.3d 736 ). The defendant's contention, however, that the court should have held a hearing prior to imposing an enhanced sentence is unpreserved for appellate review, since the defendant neither requested such a hearing nor moved to withdraw his plea on this ground (see People v. Durkin, 214 A.D.3d 741, 741, 183 N.Y.S.3d 319 ; People v. Goode–Ford, 205 A.D.3d 1051, 166 N.Y.S.3d 904 ; People v. Shealy, 195 A.D.3d 1047, 146 N.Y.S.3d 797 ). In any event, under the circumstances of this case, the court's inquiry was sufficient to determine that the defendant had violated conditions of his plea agreement (see People v. Durkin, 214 A.D.3d at 741, 183 N.Y.S.3d 319 ; People v. Shealy, 195 A.D.3d at 1048, 146 N.Y.S.3d 797 ; People v. Foster, 153 A.D.3d 1429, 1429, 60 N.Y.S.3d 692 ), and the court's findings that the defendant violated the conditions imposed at the plea proceeding were "supported by sufficient reliable and accurate information" ( People v. Sterngast, 211 A.D.3d 1043, 179 N.Y.S.3d 590 ; see People v. Valencia, 3 N.Y.3d 714, 715, 786 N.Y.S.2d 374, 819 N.E.2d 990 ; People v. Outley, 80 N.Y.2d 702, 712, 594 N.Y.S.2d 683, 610 N.E.2d 356 ).
Accordingly, the County Court providently exercised its discretion in imposing the enhanced sentence (see People v. Durkin, 214 A.D.3d at 741, 183 N.Y.S.3d 319 ; People v. Shealy, 195 A.D.3d at 1049, 146 N.Y.S.3d 797 ; People v. Takie, 172 A.D.3d 1249, 1250, 101 N.Y.S.3d 141 ).
LASALLE, P.J., CONNOLLY, GENOVESI and VOUTSINAS, JJ., concur.