People v Benninger |
2019 NY Slip Op 05235 [173 AD3d 1568] |
June 27, 2019 |
Appellate Division, Third Department |
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
The People of the State of New York,
Respondent, v Timathy A. Benninger, Appellant. |
Michael T. Baker, Public Defender, Binghamton (Andrew Newmark of counsel), for appellant.
Stephen K. Cornwell Jr., District Attorney, Binghamton (Stephen D. Ferri of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Broome County (Cawley Jr., J.), entered October 31, 2017, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of failure to register as a sex offender.
Defendant is a level three sex offender under the Sex Offender Registration Act (see
Correction Law art 6-c) who was previously convicted of failing to register as a sex offender
(see Correction Law § 168-t). In 2017, defendant was indicted for again
failing to register as a sex offender, as a class D felony, based upon his failure to provide a
change of address to the relevant authorities (see Correction Law
§§ 168-f, 168-t). Defendant thereafter pleaded guilty as charged and, in
exchange, County Court agreed to impose a prison sentence of 1 to 3 years. The court released
defendant on his own recognizance but warned him that, if he were involved in further criminal
conduct, it would not be bound to the agreed-upon sentence and could impose a prison sentence
of up to 2
Defendant's sole contention on appeal is that the sentence imposed was harsh and excessive, in that his guilty plea to a misdemeanor crime committed while awaiting sentencing on this charge did not warrant that the sentence be doubled. As defendant did not object to the enhanced sentence or move to withdraw his guilty plea, his contention is unpreserved (see People v Lopez, 157 AD3d 1163, 1163-1164 [2018]; People v Bennett, 143 AD3d 1008, 1009 [2016]).[FN*] Were we to consider this issue despite the lack of preservation, we would not be persuaded that a reduction of the sentence is warranted (see People v Smith, 162 AD3d 1408, 1409 [2018]). Most notably, this is defendant's fourth conviction for failing to register as a sex offender, reflecting his repeated disregard for his ongoing obligations as a registered sex offender. In addition, defendant has an extensive history of felony convictions, as well as multiple parole and probation violations and revocations.
Garry, P.J., Lynch, Clark, Devine and Pritzker, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.