People v. Backman

111 A.D.3d 1027, 974 N.Y.S.2d 661, 2013 NY Slip Op 7524, 2013 WL 6009579, 2013 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7477
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 14, 2013
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 111 A.D.3d 1027 (People v. Backman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
People v. Backman, 111 A.D.3d 1027, 974 N.Y.S.2d 661, 2013 NY Slip Op 7524, 2013 WL 6009579, 2013 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7477 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2013).

Opinion

McCarthy, J.

Ap[1028]*1028peal from, an order of the County Court of Broome County (Cawley, J.), entered November 8, 2010, which denied defendant’s motion for resentencing pursuant to CPL 440.46.

In 2003, defendant was convicted upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and was thereafter sentenced, as a second felony offender, to a prison term of 4V2 to 9 years. Subsequently, in March 2010, while on parole supervision, defendant violated the terms of his release and was returned to prison. In October 2010, defendant moved for resentencing seeking a reduced determinate sentence under the Drug Law Reform Act of 2009 (see L 2009, ch 56, as codified in CPL 440.46). County Court denied the motion on the basis that defendant was ineligible to apply for resentencing because he was returned to prison on a parole violation. This appeal ensued.

Regardless of the People’s concession that defendant’s status as a reincarcerated parole violator did “not render him ineligible for resentencing as a matter of law” (People v Landy, 95 AD3d 1448, 1448 [2012]; see People v Paulin, 17 NY3d 238, 244 [2011]), our review confirms that defendant reached the maximum expiration date of his sentence in March 2013 and, therefore, the subject appeal must be dismissed as moot (see People v Paulin, 17 NY3d at 242; People v Hernandez, 108 AD3d 640, 641 [2013]).

Lahtinen, J.P, Spain and Egan Jr., JJ, concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

People v. Driscoll
2019 NY Slip Op 7115 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
111 A.D.3d 1027, 974 N.Y.S.2d 661, 2013 NY Slip Op 7524, 2013 WL 6009579, 2013 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7477, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-backman-nyappdiv-2013.