Opinion
2014-02-14
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Daryl D. WILLIAMS, Sr., Defendant–Appellant.
Rebecca Currier, Auburn, for Defendant–Appellant. Jon E. Budelmann, District Attorney, Auburn (Christopher T. Valdina of Counsel), for Respondent.
Rebecca Currier, Auburn, for Defendant–Appellant. Jon E. Budelmann, District Attorney, Auburn (Christopher T. Valdina of Counsel), for Respondent.
MEMORANDUM:
Defendant appeals from a judgment revoking the probation component of the split sentence of incarceration and probation previously imposed upon his conviction of robbery in the third degree (Penal Law § 160.05) and sentencing him to a lengthier indeterminate term of incarceration. County Court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's request for an adjournment of the violation of probation hearing to enable him to obtain a copy of the plea and sentencing transcripts from the underlying conviction ( see People v. Strauts, 67 A.D.3d 1381, 1381, 889 N.Y.S.2d 783,lv. denied14 N.Y.3d 773, 898 N.Y.S.2d 105, 925 N.E.2d 110;see also People v. Darryl P., 105 A.D.3d 1439, 1440, 963 N.Y.S.2d 904,lv. denied21 N.Y.3d 1041, 972 N.Y.S.2d 538, 995 N.E.2d 854). Contrary to defendant's further contention, the People established by a preponderance of the evidence that he violated the condition of his probation that he abstain from the use of intoxicating beverages ( see People v. Flinn, 92 A.D.3d 1217, 1217–1218, 937 N.Y.S.2d 804,lv. denied18 N.Y.3d 994, 945 N.Y.S.2d 648, 968 N.E.2d 1004;People v. Jones, 50 A.D.3d 1058, 1059, 856 N.Y.S.2d 225,lv. denied10 N.Y.3d 936, 862 N.Y.S.2d 342, 892 N.E.2d 408). The State Trooper who arrested defendant for driving while intoxicated after he crashed his vehicle testified at the hearing that defendant tested positive for alcohol on the preliminary screening device, failed three sobriety tests, and admitted that he purchased beer. Also contrary to defendant's contention, the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe. We have considered defendant's remaining contentions and conclude that they are without merit.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed. CENTRA, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, SCONIERS, and WHALEN, JJ., concur.