People v. Mills
90 A.D.3d 1076, 934 N.Y.2d 862
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 27, 2011·Published·Cited by 13 cases
Opinion
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 subject him to double jeopardy or violate his right to due process of law (see People v Lingle, 16 NY3d 621, 630-632 [2011]; People v Algarin, 89 AD3d 859 [2011]).
The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit. Skelos, J.E, Angiolillo, Belen, Lott and Roman, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
People v. Mills, 90 A.D.3d 1076, 934 N.Y.2d 862 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).
90 A.D.3d 1076 (People v. Mills) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
People v. Aller
109 A.D.3d 551 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
People v. Jiggetts
108 A.D.3d 641 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
People v. Quinones
103 A.D.3d 756 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
People v. Davis
102 A.D.3d 808 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
People v. Dolberry
95 A.D.3d 1357 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
People v. Jones
94 A.D.3d 1146 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
People v. Bailey
92 A.D.3d 890 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
People v. John
92 A.D.3d 896 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)