| People v Rogers |
| 2007 NY Slip Op 09253 [45 AD3d 786] |
| November 20, 2007 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v DavidRogers, Appellant. |
—[*1] Francis D. Phillips II, District Attorney, Goshen, N.Y. (David R. Huey of counsel), forrespondent.
Appeal by the defendant from an amended judgment of the County Court, Orange County(DeRosa, J.), rendered July 31, 2006, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by thesame court upon a finding that he violated a condition thereof, upon his admission, and imposinga sentence of imprisonment upon his previous conviction of attempted criminal sale of acontrolled substance in the third degree.
Ordered that the amended judgment is affirmed.
The defendant's contention regarding the sufficiency of the factual allocution of hisadmission to a violation of probation is unpreserved for appellate review (see People v Carden, 27 AD3d573 [2006]; People v Padilla,18 AD3d 578 [2005]; People v Tavares, 197 AD2d 552 [1993]). The rare caseexception to the preservation requirement is not applicable here since the factual recitation didnot clearly cast significant doubt upon the defendant's guilt or call into question the voluntarinessof the admission (see People v Lopez, 71 NY2d 662, 666 [1988]; People v Rizzo, 38 AD3d 571[2007]; People v Nash, 38 AD3d684 [2007]).
Furthermore, the defendant's contention that the County Court improvidently exercised itsdiscretion in resentencing him on the violation of probation without obtaining an updatedpresentence report is not preserved for appellate review (see People v Gambichler, 25 AD3d 722 [2006]; People v Freeman, 2 AD3d 648,649 [2003]; People v Segar, 295 AD2d 628, 629 [2002]).[*2]
The defendant's remaining contentions are without merit.Santucci, J.P., Goldstein, Dillon and Angiolillo, JJ., concur.