Opinion
February 6, 1995
Appeal from the County Court, Dutchess County (Marlow, J.).
Ordered that the sentence is affirmed.
The defendant contends that the sentence imposed violated Penal Law § 60.01 (2) (d) because it included a period of electronic monitoring which, in effect, extended the six-month period of incarceration permissible under the statute. We find this contention to be without merit (cf., People ex rel. Kornaker v Meloni, 134 Misc.2d 444, affd 134 A.D.2d 868; see generally, Matter of Hawkins v. Coughlin, 72 N.Y.2d 158; People ex rel. Knox v. Kelly, 126 A.D.2d 318). The contention that electronic monitoring was inappropriately imposed under the circumstances of this case is also without merit, and we note that the plea agreement included participation in the electronic monitoring program as a condition of probation.
The defendant's remaining contentions with respect to his sentence are unpreserved for appellate review (see, People v Pellegrino, 60 N.Y.2d 636), without merit, or are based on matters dehors the record. Mangano, P.J., Sullivan, O'Brien, Thompson and Hart, JJ., concur.