People v. WoodruffPeople v. Woodruff
Defendant‘s sole contention is that the term of imprisonment imposed by County Court is harsh and excessive.* We disagree. She admittedly continued engaging in drug use and failing to report while on probation, which resulted in its revocation. Moreover, the prison term imposed by County Court was within the parameters specifically agreed to by defendant. Inasmuch as there are no extraordinary circumstances nor an abuse of discretion warranting a reduction of the resentence in the interest of justice, we decline to disturb it (see People v Harrison, 93 AD3d 995, 995 [2012], lv denied 19 NY3d 961 [2012]; People v Cherry, 263 AD2d 683, 683 [1999], lv denied 93 NY2d 1016 [1999]).
McCarthy, J.P., Egan Jr., Rose and Devine, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgments are affirmed.