People v. Harpe

100 A.D.3d 657, 952 N.Y.S.2d 895

This text of 100 A.D.3d 657 (People v. Harpe) 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. Harpe, 100 A.D.3d 657, 952 N.Y.S.2d 895 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a resentence of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Dowling, J), imposed April 1, 2011, which, upon his convictions of attempted murder in the second degree, the resentence being, in effect, concurrent periods of postrelease supervision in addition to the concurrent determinate terms of imprisonment previously imposed on May 2, 2003.

Ordered that the resentence is affirmed.

Inasmuch as the defendant had not yet completed serving his originally imposed sentences of imprisonment when he was resentenced, his resentencing to a term including the statutorily required periods of postrelease supervision did not violate the double jeopardy and due process clauses of the United States Constitution (see People v Lingle, 16 NY3d 621, 630-632 [2011]; People v Pemberton, 93 AD3d 681 [2012]; People v Ralph, 91 AD3d 796, 796-797 [2012]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Eng, RJ., Skelos, Chambers and Sgroi, JJ., concur.

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

Related

People v. Lingle
949 N.E.2d 952 (New York Court of Appeals, 2011)
People v. Ralph
91 A.D.3d 796 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
People v. Pemberton
93 A.D.3d 681 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
100 A.D.3d 657, 952 N.Y.S.2d 895, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-harpe-nyappdiv-2012.