Opinion
2014-10-1
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. John PALICZ, appellant.
Thomas N.N. Angell, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. (Steven Levine of counsel), for appellant. William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. (Kristen A. Rappleyea of counsel), for respondent.
Thomas N.N. Angell, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. (Steven Levine of counsel), for appellant. William V. Grady, District Attorney, Poughkeepsie, N.Y. (Kristen A. Rappleyea of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from an amended judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (Forman, J.), rendered August 6, 2013, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court, upon a finding that he violated a condition thereof, after a hearing, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his previous conviction of criminal contempt in the first degree.
ORDERED that the amended judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention that the violation of probation hearing was based totally on hearsay evidence is unpreserved for appellate review ( see People v. Park, 203 A.D.2d 596, 612 N.Y.S.2d 938). In any event, the County Court properly found, based upon a preponderance of the evidence presented at the hearing, including “a residuum of competent legal evidence” (People v. Matula, 258 A.D.2d 670, 670–671, 683 N.Y.S.2d 919), that he had violated a condition of his probation by leaving an alcohol treatment facility against medical advice ( see People v. Washington, 55 A.D.3d 933, 934, 869 N.Y.S.2d 557).
The sentence imposed was not excessive ( see People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80, 455 N.Y.S.2d 675). MASTRO, J.P., CHAMBERS, AUSTIN and SGROI, JJ., concur.