Citation Numbers: 23 A.D.3d 1062, 804 N.Y.S.2d 189
Filed Date: 11/10/2005
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/1/2024
Appeal from a judgment of the Jefferson County Court (Kim H. Martusewicz, J.), rendered June 2, 2003. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted assault in the second degree.
It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of attempted assault in the second degree
Defendant failed to preserve for our review his further contention that the procedure by which he was adjudicated a second felony offender did not satisfy the requirements of CPL 400.21 inasmuch as he did not object to any alleged procedural error with respect thereto (see People v Oliver, 63 NY2d 973 [1984]; People v Caballero, 293 AD2d 401 [2002], lv denied 98 NY2d 673 [2002]; People v Smith, 291 AD2d 292 [2002], lv denied 98 NY2d 655 [2002]). In any event, defense counsel expressly agreed to use the CPL 200.60 statement in lieu of a CPL 400.21 statement and thus waived compliance with CPL 400.21 (see generally People v Santiago, 269 AD2d 770 [2000]).
Finally, we reject defendant’s contention that the sentence is improper. Where, as here, a defendant is sentenced to an indeterminate term of incarceration, that defendant is not subject to a period of postrelease supervision (see Penal Law § 70.45 [1]). Present—Pigott, Jr., P.J., Green, Kehoe, Martoche and Pine, JJ.