[*1]Decided on June 20, 2007


PRESENT: : RUDOLPH, P.J., McCABE and TANENBAUM, JJ
2006-92 S CR.

Appeal from a judgment of the District Court of Suffolk County, First District (Patricia M. Filiberto, J.), rendered December 16, 2005. The judgment adjudicated defendant a youthful offender, upon his guilty plea to sexual misconduct, and sentenced him to a six-year term of probation.

Judgment adjudicating defendant a youthful offender affirmed.

Defendant was initially charged with rape in the first degree (Penal Law § 130.35 [1]). Following extensive negotiations, defendant pleaded guilty to sexual misconduct (Penal Law § 130.20 [1]). In exchange for his guilty plea, defendant was promised a sentence of six years' probation. Although defendant was sentenced to the agreed-upon period of probation, on appeal he argues that the sentence imposed was unduly harsh and excessive. It is well settled that "where a sentence is within the permissible statutory guidelines, it will not be disturbed unless there is a clear showing that the sentencing court abused its discretion or that extraordinary circumstances exist which require a modification of the sentence" (People v Veeneman, 10 Misc 3d 136[A], 2005 NY Slip Op 52133[U] [App Term, 9th & 10th Jud Dists]). In this case, the sentence imposed was specifically authorized (Penal Law § 65.00 [3] [b] [ii]) and bargained for, and defendant has not presented any extraordinary circumstances which require a modification of the sentence. Accordingly, the judgment adjudicating defendant a youthful offender is affirmed.

Rudolph, P.J., McCabe and Tanenbaum, JJ., concur.