People v. Dow
This text of 93 A.D.3d 857 (People v. Dow) 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.
Opinion
Since the defendant had not yet completed his originally imposed sentence of imprisonment when he was resentenced, the resentencing to a term including the statutorily required period of postrelease supervision did not subject him to double jeopardy or violate his right to due process of law (see People v Lingle, 16 NY3d 621 [2011]; People v Edwards, 89 AD3d 1034 [2011]; People v Douglas, 89 AD3d 959 [2011]; People v Harris, 89 AD3d 863 [2011]; People v Algarin, 89 AD3d 859 [2011], lv denied 18 NY3d 881 [2012]; People v Dawkins, 87 AD3d 550 [2011]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court erred in granting the defendant’s motion to vacate the resentence.
Moreover, this Court lacks the authority to reconsider on this appeal the incarceratory component of the defendant’s sentence (cf. People v Lingle, 16 NY3d at 635; People v Edwards, 89 AD3d 1034 [2011]; People v Myrick, 84 AD3d 1272 [2011]). Rivera, J.E, Skelos, Dillon and Angiolillo, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
93 A.D.3d 857, 940 N.Y.S.2d 884, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-dow-nyappdiv-2012.