Opinion
767 KA 22-00419
11-17-2023
THOMAS L. PELYCH, HORNELL, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. BRITTANY GROME ANTONACCI, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, AUBURN (CHRISTOPHER T. VALDINA OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
THOMAS L. PELYCH, HORNELL, FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
BRITTANY GROME ANTONACCI, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, AUBURN (CHRISTOPHER T. VALDINA OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., LINDLEY, MONTOUR, GREENWOOD, AND DELCONTE, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal contempt in the first degree ( Penal Law § 215.51 [c] ) and driving while intoxicated as a misdemeanor ( Vehicle and Traffic Law §§ 1192 [3] ; 1193 [1] [b] [i]). "Although defendant's release to parole supervision does not render his challenge to the severity of the sentence moot because he remains under the control of the Parole Board until his sentence has terminated" ( People v. Williams , 160 A.D.3d 1470, 1471, 72 N.Y.S.3d 906 [4th Dept. 2018] [internal quotation marks omitted]), we reject defendant's contention that the sentence in this case is unduly harsh and severe insofar as it runs consecutively to a prior undischarged sentence (see People v. Romanowski , 196 A.D.3d 1080, 1081, 147 N.Y.S.3d 493 [4th Dept. 2021], lv denied 37 N.Y.3d 1029, 153 N.Y.S.3d 432, 175 N.E.3d 457 [2021] ).