| People v Donaldson |
| 2013 NY Slip Op 06410 [110 AD3d 1120] |
| October 3, 2013 |
| Appellate Division, Third Department |
| The People of the State of New York, Respondent, vTimothy P. Donaldson, Appellant. |
—[*1] Nicole M. Duve, District Attorney, Canton (Alexander Lesyk of counsel), forrespondent.
Rose, J.P. Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of St. Lawrence County(Richards, J.), rendered June 15, 2012, which revoked defendant's probation and imposeda sentence of incarceration.
In 2009, defendant pleaded guilty to driving while intoxicated and was sentenced tofive years of probation. In 2012, he admitted to violating certain conditions of hisprobation, including the condition prohibiting him from owning or operating any motorvehicles, with the understanding that County Court would sentence him to 90 days in jailand reinstate his probation with additional conditions being imposed. County Courtthereafter sentenced defendant pursuant to the agreement and imposed additionalconditions, including that defendant dispose of the three motor vehicles he owned inviolation of his probation. Defendant appeals.
Defendant's sole contention on appeal is that County Court abused its discretion inimposing the condition requiring him to dispose of his motor vehicles. We disagree."Conditions of probation are appropriate when the court determines that they arereasonably necessary to insure that the defendant will lead a law-abiding life or to assisthim or her in doing so, or are reasonably related to his or her rehabilitation" (People v Brown, 62 AD3d1209, 1210 [2009] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]; seePenal Law § 65.10 [1], [2]; People v Hannah, 65 AD3d 1378, 1379 [2009], lvdenied 13 NY3d 907 [2009]; People v Swenson, 12 [*2]AD3d 948, 948 [2004]). Further, a condition may beimposed if the court determines that it is "necessary or appropriate to ameliorate theconduct which gave rise to the offense or to prevent the incarceration of the defendant"(Penal Law § 65.10 [5]; see People v Brown, 62 AD3d at 1210). Here,defendant admitted to owning and operating motor vehicles without a driver's licensewhile on probation, despite conditions prohibiting him from such activity. In our view,the additional condition imposed requiring defendant to dispose of his currently-ownedmotor vehicles is tailored to his offense and is reasonably related to his rehabilitation andnecessary to ameliorate the conduct leading to defendant's conviction (see People vHale, 93 NY2d 454, 462 [1999]; People v Franco, 69 AD3d 981, 983 [2010]). Accordingly,we conclude that County Court did not abuse its discretion in imposing the condition.
Stein, McCarthy and Garry, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.