| People v Grant |
| 2014 NY Slip Op 07681 [122 AD3d 767] |
| November 12, 2014 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
[*1]
| The People of the State of New York,Respondent, v Madi A. Grant, Appellant. |
Robert C. Mitchell, Riverhead, N.Y. (Alfred J. Cicale of counsel), for appellant.
Thomas J. Spota, District Attorney, Riverhead, N.Y. (Rosalind C. Gray andMichael J. Miller of counsel), for respondent.
Appeals by the defendant from two judgments of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County(IDV Part) (Crecca, J.), both rendered May 10, 2012, convicting him of criminalcontempt in the second degree under indictment No. 7200-11, and aggravated unlicensedoperation of a motor vehicle under indictment No. 7025-12, upon his pleas of guilty, andimposing sentences. Assigned counsel has submitted a brief in accordance withAnders v California (386 US 738 [1967]) with respect to the appeal from thejudgment rendered under indictment No. 7025-12, in which he moves for leave towithdraw as counsel for the appellant.
Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.
With respect to the appeal from the judgment rendered under indictment No.7200-11, the defendant contends that the Supreme Court erred in imposing a sentencegreater than that which had been promised without affording him the opportunity towithdraw his plea of guilty. This contention is unpreserved for appellate review, since thedefendant failed to move to withdraw his plea on this ground prior to the imposition ofsentence or otherwise raise the issue in the Supreme Court (see People v Murray, 15 NY3d725, 726 [2010]; People vGuillen, 37 AD3d 493 [2007]; People v Szyjko, 17 AD3d 609 [2005]). In any event, whenthe defendant failed to comply with the condition of his plea agreement that he appear onthe scheduled sentencing date, the court was no longer bound by the original pleaagreement, and had the right to impose a greater sentence (see People v Figgins,87 NY2d 840, 841 [1995]; People v Hubbard, 105 AD3d 760 [2013]; People v Marte, 85 AD3d945, 946 [2011]; People vWhite, 3 AD3d 543, 544 [2004]). Moreover, as the defendant was aware that hefaced an enhanced sentence if he failed to comply with the plea agreement, the enhancedsentence was appropriate (see People v White, 3 AD3d at 544; People vDelatorre, 306 AD2d 419, 420 [2003]; People v Walters, 273 AD2d 418[2000]).
With respect to the appeal from the judgment rendered under indictment No.7025-12, we are satisfied with the sufficiency of the brief filed by the defendant'sassigned counsel pursuant to Anders v California (386 US 738 [1967]), and,upon an independent review of the record, we conclude that there are no nonfrivolousissues that could be raised on the appeal from that judgment. Counsel's application forleave to withdraw as counsel is, therefore, granted (see Anders v [*2]California, 386 US 738 [1967]; Matter of Giovanni S. [JasminA.], 89 AD3d 252 [2011]; People v Paige, 54 AD2d 631 [1976];cf. People v Gonzalez, 47 NY2d 606 [1979]). Dillon, J.P., Dickerson,Roman and Sgroi, JJ., concur.