People v. Mendez

73 A.D.3d 951, 899 N.Y.S.2d 873
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 11, 2010·Published·Cited by 21 cases

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a resentence of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Roman, J.), imposed September 25, 2008, which, upon his conviction of robbery in the second degree (four counts) and assault in the second degree (two counts), upon a jury verdict, imposed a term of postrelease supervision of three years on each count of robbery in the first degree and a [952] term of postrelease supervision of two years on each count of assault in the second degree, to run concurrently with each other, in addition to the determinate sentence of imprisonment originally imposed on August 21, 2003.

Ordered that the resentence is affirmed.

The defendant was convicted, after a jury trial, of robbery in thé second degree (four counts) and assault in the second degree (two counts). On August 21, 2003, he was sentenced to concurrent determinate terms of imprisonment consisting of 10 years, 8 years, 7 years, and 5 years, respectively, on the convictions of robbery in the second degree, and 5 years and 3 years, respectively, on the convictions of assault in the second degree. In 2008, while the defendant was still incarcerated and serving the original sentence, the defendant was brought before the Supreme Court for resentencing, so that the mandatory period of postrelease supervision could be imposed (see Penal Law § 70.45; Correction Law § 601-d).

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the resentencing did not subject him to double jeopardy (see People v Prendergast, 71 AD3d 1055 [2010]; cf. People v Williams, 14 NY3d 198 [2010]). Further, his constitutional right to due process was not violated by the resentencing (see People v Scalercio, 71 AD3d 1060 [2010]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Rivera, J.P, Fisher, Florio and Austin, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Mendez, 73 A.D.3d 951, 899 N.Y.S.2d 873 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2010).

73 A.D.3d 951 (People v. Mendez) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Briggs
82 A.D.3d 1001 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
People v. George
82 A.D.3d 903 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
People v. Cheatham
81 A.D.3d 971 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
People v. Williams
81 A.D.3d 756 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
People v. Watson
79 A.D.3d 912 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
People v. Negron
78 A.D.3d 1079 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
People v. Johnson
78 A.D.3d 965 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
People v. Henry
78 A.D.3d 861 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
People v. Brown
78 A.D.3d 856 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
People v. Ware
78 A.D.3d 743 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
People v. Young
78 A.D.3d 744 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
People v. Misla
78 A.D.3d 735 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
People v. Ragbirsingh
78 A.D.3d 738 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
People v. Adams
77 A.D.3d 844 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
People v. Watkins
77 A.D.3d 857 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
People v. Gittens
77 A.D.3d 765 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
People v. Woods
77 A.D.3d 690 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
People v. Pruitt
74 A.D.3d 1366 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)