People v. Quinones

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Quinones

83 A.D.3d 431, 919 N.Y.S.2d 339

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedApril 5, 2011

StatusPublished

This text of 83 A.D.3d 431 (People v. Quinones) 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. Quinones, 83 A.D.3d 431, 919 N.Y.S.2d 339 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

[432]*432Judgment of resentence, Supreme Court, New York County (Roger S. Hayes, J.), rendered December 1, 2009, resentencing defendant, as a second felony offender, to a term of five years, with three years’ postrelease supervision, unanimously affirmed.

After granting defendant’s CPL 440.46 resentencing motion, the court sufficiently reduced the sentence. Since defendant has completed his prison term, the only material issue before us is whether he should receive a shorter period of postrelease supervision. Given defendant’s criminal and prison disciplinary history, we find that the public interest would not be served by reducing the portion of his sentence that is designed to “ensure that such offenders are appropriately monitored upon their reintroduction into society” (People v Sparber, 10 NY3d 457, 469 [2008]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Sweeny, Renwick, Richter and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

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

[432]*432Judgment of resentence, Supreme Court, New York County (Roger S. Hayes, J.), rendered December 1, 2009, resentencing defendant, as a second felony offender, to a term of five years, with three years’ postrelease supervision, unanimously affirmed.

After granting defendant’s CPL 440.46 resentencing motion, the court sufficiently reduced the sentence. Since defendant has completed his prison term, the only material issue before us is whether he should receive a shorter period of postrelease supervision. Given defendant’s criminal and prison disciplinary history, we find that the public interest would not be served by reducing the portion of his sentence that is designed to “ensure that such offenders are appropriately monitored upon their reintroduction into society” (People v Sparber, 10 NY3d 457, 469 [2008]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Sweeny, Renwick, Richter and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

83 A.D.3d 431, 919 N.Y.S.2d 339, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-quinones-nyappdiv-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack