People v. Mitchell
Opinion of the Court
Appeal by the defendant from an amended judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Hurley, J.), rendered June 13, 1991, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court, upon a finding that he had violated a condition thereof, after a hearing, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon his previous conviction of driving while intoxicated as a felony and aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle in the second degree.
Ordered that the amended judgment is affirmed.
The defendant’s contention that the People failed to prove that he violated the conditions of his probation by a prepon
Moreover, it was not an improvident exercise of discretion for the court to deny defense counsel’s request for an adjournment of the sentencing for an unspecified period of time merely because the defendant wished to accumulate "good time” credit toward some future sentence that might be imposed in a pending, but unrelated, criminal case against him (see, CPL 380.30 [3]; People v Reising, 106 AD2d 522).
Finally, the sentence imposed was neither harsh nor excessive (see generally, People v Suitte, 90 AD2d 80; People v Notey, 72 AD2d 279). Mangano, P. J., Harwood, Balletta and Fiber, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.