Ordered that the amended sentence is affirmed.
In imposing an amended sentence upon the defendant's violation of probation, it was within the sentencing court's discretion to direct that the amended sentence run consecutively to the undischarged term of imprisonment previously imposed in Westchester County (Penal Law § 70.25; People v. Jackson, 106 A.D.2d 93). Moreover, we perceive no basis for concluding that the trial court abused its discretion with respect to its sentencing determination, or that we should substitute our own discretion for that of the trial court by modifying the sentence (see, People v. Suitte, 90 A.D.2d 80).
We have considered the defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Mollen, P.J., Bracken, Lawrence, Kooper and Sullivan, JJ., concur.