Opinion
November 28, 1989
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (George Covington, J.).
It is apparent from the record of the entry of defendant's guilty plea that he did not truly intend to controvert his prior felony conviction. This is confirmed by his failure to subsequently raise the issue at the time of sentencing. Finally, defendant did not comply with the pertinent statutory requirements as he failed to specify the particular allegations he wished to controvert (CPL 400.15; People v Sailor, 65 N.Y.2d 224, 235, cert denied 474 U.S. 982).
The sentence imposed was not excessive. Taking into account, "among other things, the crime charged, the particular circumstances of the individual before the court and the purpose of a penal sanction", we perceive no abuse of discretion warranting a reduction in sentence (People v Farrar, 52 N.Y.2d 302, 305).
Further, defendant was sentenced in accordance with his plea bargain and within statutory guidelines. "Having received the benefit of his bargain, defendant should be bound by its terms" (People v Felman, 141 A.D.2d 889, 890, lv denied 72 N.Y.2d 918).
Concur — Ross, J.P., Asch, Rosenberger, Smith and Rubin, JJ.