People v. Campanella

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Campanella

297 A.D.2d 642, 746 N.Y.2d 905, 746 N.Y.S.2d 905, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8266

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided September 9, 2002·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

As the People correctly concede, under the circumstances of this case, the defendant established a legitimate expectation in the finality of his original maximum sentence of 18 years’ imprisonment, and the Supreme Court’s imposition of a maximum term of imprisonment of more than 18 years upon [643]*643resentencing the defendant violated the prohibition against double jeopardy (see Stewart v Scully, 925 F2d 58, 62-65; People v Hoppie, 220 AD2d 528, 529). The illegality of the defendant’s original sentence should have been corrected by reducing the minimum term of imprisonment to one third of the maximum. Florio, J.P., Feuerstein, Krausman and Crane, JJ., concur.

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

As the People correctly concede, under the circumstances of this case, the defendant established a legitimate expectation in the finality of his original maximum sentence of 18 years’ imprisonment, and the Supreme Court’s imposition of a maximum term of imprisonment of more than 18 years upon [643]*643resentencing the defendant violated the prohibition against double jeopardy (see Stewart v Scully, 925 F2d 58, 62-65; People v Hoppie, 220 AD2d 528, 529). The illegality of the defendant’s original sentence should have been corrected by reducing the minimum term of imprisonment to one third of the maximum. Florio, J.P., Feuerstein, Krausman and Crane, JJ., concur.

People v. Campanella, 297 A.D.2d 642, 746 N.Y.2d 905, 746 N.Y.S.2d 905, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8266 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

297 A.D.2d 642 (People v. Campanella) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related