PEOPLE v. VAN EVERY (2006)

 On appeal from a judgment revoking his probation and sentencing him to a term of incarceration, defendant contends that the evidence is legally insufficient to support Supreme Court's finding that he violated the terms and conditions of his probation.   We reject that contention.  “The People properly presented the requisite ‘residuum of competent legal evidence’ and thus met their burden of establishing by a preponderance of the evidence that defendant violated the terms and conditions of his probation” (People v. Michael J.F., 15 A.D.3d 952, 953, 788 N.Y.S.2d 910, quoting People v. Pettway, 286 A.D.2d 865, 865, 730 N.Y.S.2d 597, lv. denied 97 N.Y.2d 686, 738 N.Y.S.2d 302, 764 N.E.2d 406).   The further contention of defendant challenging the factual sufficiency of the plea allocution underlying the original judgment is not properly before us because, as defendant concedes, he did not appeal from the original judgment (see People v. Hall, 5 A.D.3d 1011, 773 N.Y.S.2d 632).

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed.

MEMORANDUM: