Opinion
KA 03-00217.
Decided April 30, 2004.
Appeal from a judgment of the Steuben County Court (Joseph W. Latham, J.), rendered December 17, 2002. The judgment revoked defendant's probation and imposed a sentence of imprisonment.
SALVATORE C. ADAMO, BUFFALO, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
JOHN C. TUNNEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT. It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal from the judgment insofar as it imposes sentence be and the same hereby is unanimously dismissed and the judgment is affirmed.
Before: PRESENT: PIGOTT, JR., P.J., PINE, SCUDDER, GORSKI, AND HAYES, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ordered that said appeal from the judgment insofar as it imposes sentence be and the same hereby is unanimously dismissed and the judgment is affirmed.
Memorandum: Because defendant failed to move to withdraw his admission to a violation of probation or to vacate the judgment of conviction, he has failed to preserve for our review his contention that his admission was not knowingly, voluntarily or intelligently entered ( see People v. Sawinski, 294 A.D.2d 667, 668, lv denied 98 N.Y.2d 701; People v. Viruet, 288 A.D.2d 407, lv denied 97 N.Y.2d 710; People v. Woods, 281 A.D.2d 929, lv denied 96 N.Y.2d 870). In any event, that contention is without merit. Because defendant has completed serving the sentence imposed, his contention that the sentence is unduly harsh and severe has been rendered moot ( see People v. Parente, 4 A.D.3d 793; People v. James, 269 A.D.2d 845, 846; People v. Griffin, 239 A.D.2d 936). We have examined defendant's remaining contention and conclude that it does not require reversal.