Opinion
August 29, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Felig, J.).
Ordered that the sentence is affirmed.
The defendant's waiver of his right to appeal was conditioned on the premise that the sentence which would be imposed was the promised sentence. Since the court ultimately imposed a harsher sentence than that originally promised, the waiver of the right to appeal should not be enforced (see, People v. Poole, 202 A.D.2d 450; People v. Prescott, 196 A.D.2d 599). However, we find the sentence imposed was not unduly harsh nor excessive (see, People v. Delgado, 80 N.Y.2d 780; People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80). Mangano, P.J., Rosenblatt, Miller, Copertino and Krausman, JJ., concur.