Opinion
06-16-2017
The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Andrew C. LEADER, Defendant–Appellant.
Adam H. Vanbuskirk, Auburn, for defendant-appellant. Jon E. Budelmann, District Attorney, Auburn (Christopher T. Valdina of Counsel), for respondent.
Adam H. Vanbuskirk, Auburn, for defendant-appellant.
Jon E. Budelmann, District Attorney, Auburn (Christopher T. Valdina of Counsel), for respondent.
MEMORANDUM:
Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of two counts of burglary in the third degree (Penal Law § 140.20 ). Defendant contends that he was denied his right to be sentenced without an unreasonable delay in violation of CPL 380.30(1) (see People v. Drake, 61 N.Y.2d 359, 364, 474 N.Y.S.2d 276, 462 N.E.2d 376 ). Even assuming, arguendo, that defendant preserved his contention for our review by objecting to the delay (see People v. Washington, 121 A.D.3d 1583, 1583, 992 N.Y.S.2d 919 ), we conclude that it lacks merit. "[O]nly unexcusable or unduly long delays violate the statutory directive" (People v. Dissottle, 68 A.D.3d 1542, 1543, 893 N.Y.S.2d 649 ; see Drake, 61 N.Y.2d at 366, 474 N.Y.S.2d 276, 462 N.E.2d 376 ) and, here, defendant was sentenced fewer than six months after he entered his guilty plea. The portion of that period attributable to defendant's grand jury testimony against a codefendant is excusable (see People v. Ingvarsdottir, 118 A.D.3d 1023, 1024, 987 N.Y.S.2d 460 ), and another portion of that period was attributable to at least two adjournments requested by defense counsel (see People v. Brooks, 118 A.D.3d 1123, 1124, 987 N.Y.S.2d 249, lv. denied 24 N.Y.3d 959, 996 N.Y.S.2d 218, 20 N.E.3d 998 ). We reject defendant's further contention that the sentence is unduly harsh and severe.
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
WHALEN, P.J., PERADOTTO, DeJOSEPH, CURRAN, and WINSLOW, JJ., concur.