| People v Bragg |
| 2012 NY Slip Op 05182 [96 AD3d 1071] |
| June 27, 2012 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Ronald Bragg, Appellant. |
—[*1]
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Dutchess County (T. Dolan,J.), rendered July 22, 2010, convicting him of attempted criminal sexual act in the first degree,upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
The defendant pleaded guilty to attempted criminal sexual act in the first degree in exchangefor an agreed-upon sentence. During the plea colloquy, the defendant acknowledged that one ofthe conditions of the plea agreement was that he cooperate fully with and tell the truth to theProbation Department in connection with its preparation of the presentence report, and that henot minimize his conduct. Additionally, the court advised the defendant that, if he failed to honorthe terms of the plea agreement, he could be subject to an enhanced sentence, and the courtwould not permit him to withdraw his plea.
The defendant's contentions that the County Court's warnings concerning the consequencesof his failure to comply with the terms of his plea agreement were insufficient, and that the courterred in failing to hold a hearing to determine whether he violated a term of his plea agreementbefore sentencing him to an enhanced term of imprisonment, are unpreserved for appellatereview (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Dietz, 66 AD3d 1400 [2009]; People v Maglione, 18 AD3d 670[2005]). In any event, the defendant's contentions are without merit. Contrary to the defendant'scontention, the County Court's warning was "explicit and objective, and was acknowledged,understood, and accepted by the defendant as part of the plea agreement" (People v Butler, 49 AD3d 894,895 [2008]; see People v Blackwell,62 AD3d 896, 897 [2009]; see also People v Hicks, 98 NY2d 185, 189 [2002]).Furthermore, in his interviews with the Probation Department, the defendant did not admit to anywrongdoing, stated that he did nothing illegal, "denied . . . having committed theoffense to which he pled guilty," "denie[d] that he committed any crime," and terminated theinterview, preventing the probation officer from completing the investigation. Under thecircumstances of this case, the County Court properly determined that the defendant violated theterm of the plea agreement which required him to cooperate with the Probation Department,answer its questions truthfully, and not minimize his conduct, and the court properly imposed anenhanced sentence based on the defendant's violation of the plea agreement (see People vBlackwell, 62 AD3d at 897; People v Butler, 49 AD3d at 895; see generallyPeople v Hicks, 98 NY2d 185 [2002]; People v Outley, 80 NY2d 702 [1993]).Skelos, J.P., Dickerson, Leventhal and Roman, JJ., concur.