Ordered that the sentences are affirmed.
The defendant was afforded an opportunity prior to pronouncement of sentences to refute or explain any information contained in the presentence report which he deemed inaccurate and to make such statements to the sentencing court as he deemed advisable. The sentencing court therefore acted properly when it sentenced the defendant after receiving a presentence report for which the defendant declined to be interviewed (see, People v. Tumerman, 133 A.D.2d 714, 716; People v. Scales, 121 A.D.2d 578, 579). Moreover, we discern no basis for reducing the longest of the three concurrent sentences imposed, the only sentence which the defendant presently challenges as excessive (People v. Kazepis, 101 A.D.2d 816). Mangano, J.P., Brown, Lawrence, Kooper and Harwood, JJ., concur.