PETERS, J.
In May 2003, after pleading guilty to a charge of criminal contempt in the first degree grounded upon a violation of an order of protection concerning defendant's paramour, defendant was sentenced to five years probation. A permanent order of protection was issued to prevent defendant from harassing, annoying or alarming her. In June 2004, a declaration of delinquency was filed, alleging that defendant violated his probation. After a hearing, County Court revoked defendant's probation and sentenced him to a prison term of 1 to 3 years. Defendant appeals and we affirm.
Addressing the statutory requirement of a prompt hearing ( see CPL 410.70), the record demonstrates that there was neither a statutory nor due process violation ( see People v. Harris, 301 AD2d 753, 753-754, lv denied 99 NY2d 629) because defendant's hearing was delayed as a result of his own requests. With respect to those contentions alleging calendaring delays, we find that County Court properly exercised its discretion in managing its docket ( see People v. Brewer, 91 NY2d 999, 1000).
One request was to have more time to consider a plea offer and the other request was in connection with a substitution of counsel.
As to the merits, defendant's admissions at the hearing were sufficient to establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, that he violated the terms of his probation ( see People v. Parsons, 15 AD3d 728, 728; People v. Romeo, 9 AD3d 744, 745). Further finding neither an abuse of discretion nor extraordinary circumstances warranting a reduction in defendant's sentence ( see People v. Perkins, 5 AD3d 801, 804, lv denied 3 NY3d 741; People v. Meyer, 1 AD3d 721, 721, lv denied 1 NY3d 631), we affirm.
Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.