People v. Pruitt

74 A.D.3d 1366, 903 N.Y.S.2d 239
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 29, 2010
StatusPublished
Cited by21 cases

This text of 74 A.D.3d 1366 (People v. Pruitt) 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. Pruitt, 74 A.D.3d 1366, 903 N.Y.S.2d 239 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2010).

Opinion

[1367]*1367Appeal by the defendant from a resentence of the County Court, Nassau County (Jaeger, J.), imposed August 6, 2008, which, upon his conviction of rape in the first degree and sexual abuse in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, imposed periods of postrelease supervision of five years in addition to the determinate terms of imprisonment previously imposed on March 14, 2001.

Ordered that the resentence is affirmed.

The defendant was convicted, after a jury trial, of rape in the first degree and sexual abuse in the first degree. On March 14, 2001 he was sentenced to concurrent determinate terms of imprisonment of 18 years and 7 years, respectively. In 2008, while the defendant was still incarcerated and serving the original sentence, the defendant was brought before the County Court for resentencing, so that the mandatory periods of post-release supervision could be imposed (see Penal Law § 70.45; Correction Law § 601-d).

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, his constitutional right to due process was not violated by the resentencing (see People v Sparber, 10 NY3d 457, 469-472 [2008]; People v Mendez, 73 AD3d 951 [2010]; People v Scalercio, 71 AD3d 1060 [2010]).

The defendant’s contention that Correction Law § 601-d constitutes an unconstitutional ex post facto law is unpreserved for appellate review and, in any event, without merit (cf. People v Williams, 14 NY3d 198, 220 n 5 [2010]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Skelos, J.P., Eng, Hall and Lott, JJ., concur.

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

Related

People v. Barnes
120 A.D.3d 1355 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
MILLS, RICHARD v. LEMPKE, JOHN
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013
People ex rel. Mills v. Lempke
112 A.D.3d 1365 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
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. Scott
81 A.D.3d 988 (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. Watson
79 A.D.3d 912 (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. Clark
78 A.D.3d 858 (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. 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)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
74 A.D.3d 1366, 903 N.Y.S.2d 239, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-pruitt-nyappdiv-2010.