Opinion
November 14, 1994
Appeal from the County Court, Westchester County (LaCava, J.).
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
We reject the defendant's contention that the court erred in sentencing him without the benefit of a complete updated pre-sentence report. Since the pre-sentence report indicates that the defendant refused to be interviewed by the probation department, he cannot complain that the pre-sentence report is incomplete (see, People v. Marin, 157 A.D.2d 804; People v Morales, 127 A.D.2d 797; People v. Scales, 121 A.D.2d 578). In addition, even if the defendant's allegation that he did not refuse to be interviewed is true, the record clearly indicates that the court afforded the defendant an opportunity at sentencing to make any statement he wished which would become part of the pre-sentence report. Having failed to take advantage of this opportunity, we must conclude that the defendant waived his objection (see, People v. Kryminski, 154 A.D.2d 549). Thompson, J.P., Miller, O'Brien, Santucci and Joy, JJ., concur.