Majority
First, defendant asserts that he was improperly sentenced as a second felony offender because County Court failed to comply with the requirements of CPL 400.21. That claim, however, is unpreserved for our review in light of defendant’s failure to raise the appropriate objection at the time of sentencing (see People v Clark, 54 AD3d 1099 , 1099-1100 [2008]). As for defendant’s second contention, that the sentence imposed is harsh and excessive, defendant’s appeal waiver precludes him from advancing such a claim (see People v Getter, 52 AD3d 1117 , 1118 [2008]). Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.
Peters, J.P., Spain, Lahtinen, Kane and Stein, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.
Cases cited
- People v. Clark 54 AD3d 1099 at 1099-1100 p. 1172
- People v. Getter 52 AD3d 1117 at 1118 p. 1172