| People v Bice |
| 2012 NY Slip Op 07337 [100 AD3d 1107] |
| November 8, 2012 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Charles J.Bice, Appellant. |
—[*1] Gerald F. Mollen, District Attorney, Binghamton (Joann Rose Parry of counsel), forrespondent.
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Broome County (Cawley Jr., J.), renderedJune 3, 2011, which revoked defendant's probation and imposed a sentence of imprisonment.
Defendant waived indictment and agreed to be prosecuted by a superior court informationcharging him with forgery in the second degree and endangering the welfare of a child. Insatisfaction thereof, he pleaded guilty to attempted forgery in the second degree and endangeringthe welfare of a child. In accordance with the terms of the plea agreement, defendant wassentenced to time served and five years of probation. County Court warned him, however, that ifhe violated the terms of his probation, he would be resentenced to a term of imprisonment of asmuch as 1 to 3 years. Defendant subsequently admitted to violating the terms of his probationand was resentenced to 1 to 3 years in prison. He now appeals.
Defendant's sole contention is that the resentence imposed upon him by County Courtfollowing the revocation of his probation is harsh and excessive. Upon reviewing the record, wedisagree. Defendant has a lengthy criminal record and has demonstrated an inability to complywith the terms of his probation. While his abuse of alcohol appears to be the source of hisproblems, he has not shown a willingness to seriously address his addiction. Notably,"self-induced alcohol and substance abuse problems are not extraordinary circumstances meritingreduction of [a] sentence" (People vPotter, 54 AD3d 444, 445 [2008]). In view of this, as well as the fact that defendant wasadvised of the prison term to be imposed upon resentencing when he admitted to the probationviolation, we find no abuse of discretion or any extraordinary [*2]circumstances warranting a reduction of the sentence in the interestof justice (see People v Kornell, 85AD3d 1449, 1449-1450 [2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 860 [2011]; People vPidcoe, 294 AD2d 715 [2002]; People v Bass, 261 AD2d 651, 652 [1999]).
Mercure, J.P., Rose, Kavanagh, Stein and McCarthy, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgmentis affirmed.