In People v. Jones, 99 A.D.2d 1 (3rd Dep't, 1984), the court "expressly promised that defendant would receive a sentence of not more than 60 days in jail and a $ 500 fine, with the sole proviso being that upon the court's review of the presentence probation report, if 'something shows up that indicates to me a more severe sentence should be imposed, why, then, of course, the commitment here no longer stands. I will, however, permit you to withdraw your plea of guilty'." (at p. 2) At the time of sentencing, the court stated that there was nothing in the probation report that indicated the need for a harsher sentence than previously agreed upon but, "declared its intention, however, to impose a term of probation in addition to the sentence previously promised on the ground that it was through inadvertence that it did not 'mention' the additional term of probation at the pre-plea conference or when the plea was taken." (at p. 2). The Appellate Division held that since the court stated that there were no unknown facts set forth in the probation report, the defendant was entitled to specific performance of the on the record promise.