Appeal from an amended judgment of the District Court of Suffolk County, Sixth District (Stephen L. Ukeiley, J.), rendered August 18, 2011. The amended judgment, following a hearing, revoked so much of a sentence previously imposed as sentenced defendant to a conditional discharge, upon a finding that defendant had violated the terms thereof, and resentenced defendant, upon his conviction of violating Brookhaven Town Code § 82.3, to pay an additional $500 fine and to another conditional discharge, with the requirement that he repair his premises within 45 days.

ORDERED that the amended judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Following a nonjury trial, defendant was convicted of violating Brookhaven Town Code § 82-3 ("Neighborhood preservation requirements") and was sentenced to pay a fine of $250 and to a "conditional discharge to fix the items that are in disrepair" at his premises by May 14, 2009. In September 2009, following a hearing, the court revoked the sentence of conditional discharge, upon a finding that defendant had violated the conditions thereof, and resentenced defendant to pay an additional $600 fine and to another conditional discharge, with the requirement that he repair his premises by October 14, 2009. Defendant appealed from the foregoing judgment of conviction and amended judgment of conviction, which judgment and amended judgment were affirmed by this court by order dated June 17, 2011 (31 Misc 3d 152[A], 2011 NY Slip Op 51133[U]). Thereafter, a Town of Brookhaven building inspector re-inspected defendant's premises and filed a declaration of delinquency against defendant. At the August 18, 2011 hearing thereon, the inspector testified that he found that the conditions at defendant's premises had worsened due to the passage of time and due to the fact that no repairs had been made. Defendant testified, among other things, that had he not had to spend money clearing his name, he "could have used it . . . to fix up the problem." By order dated August 18, 2011, the District Court found that defendant had violated the terms of the conditional discharge, revoked so much of the prior sentence as imposed the conditional discharge, and resentenced defendant to pay an additional $500 fine and to another conditional discharge, with the requirement that defendant repair the premises within 45 days. This appeal by defendant ensued.

It is uncontroverted that defendant did not comply with the terms of the conditional [*2]discharge. Consequently, after finding that defendant had violated the conditional discharge, the District Court properly amended the judgment of conviction and resentenced defendant. The remaining contentions raised by defendant either lack merit or are not properly before this court (see People v Boone, 84 AD3d 1108 [2011]; People v Gantt, 77 AD3d 988, 989 [2010]; People v Ryder, 239 AD2d 364 [1997]).

Accordingly, the amended judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Nicolai, P.J., LaSalle and Marano, JJ., concur.
Decision Date: October 29, 2013