PEOPLE v. MENDEZ

Ordered that the order is affirmed.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying, without a hearing, the defendant's motion to vacate the judgment of conviction on the basis of certain allegedly newly-discovered evidence ( see People v Baxley, 84 NY2d 208, 212; People v Crimmins, 38 NY2d 407, 419; People v Perkins, 234 AD2d 482). The affidavit from a fellow inmate that the defendant submitted merely contradicted the evidence adduced at the trial, and was not "of such character as to create a probability that had [it] been received at the trial the verdict would have been more favorable to the defendant" (CPL 440.10 [g]; see People v Cruz, 23 AD3d 577; People v Perkins, 234 AD2d at 482).