People v. Vardaro

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Vardaro

124 A.D.2d 760, 508 N.Y.S.2d 480, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 62077

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

DecidedNovember 17, 1986

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 124 A.D.2d 760 (People v. Vardaro) 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. Vardaro, 124 A.D.2d 760, 508 N.Y.S.2d 480, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 62077 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

[761]*761The evidence adduced at the hearing was sufficient to support the finding that the defendant violated the terms of his probation (see, CPL 410.70; People v Bacchi, 112 AD2d 940). In resentencing the defendant, however, the court simply continued the defendant’s original sentence of probation, which had included a special condition of 60 days’ incarceration, and which had already been served by the defendant, and imposed a further special condition of six months’ incarceration. Thus, the sentencing court has now added to the defendant’s original sentence a condition of incarceration in excess of six months, thus rendering it illegal (see, Penal Law § 60.01 [2] [d]; People v Jones, 72 AD2d 779). Therefore, we have reduced the further special condition of incarceration to a term of four months in order that the total period of incarceration will not exceed six months. Brown, J. P., Rubin, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.

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

[761]*761The evidence adduced at the hearing was sufficient to support the finding that the defendant violated the terms of his probation (see, CPL 410.70; People v Bacchi, 112 AD2d 940). In resentencing the defendant, however, the court simply continued the defendant’s original sentence of probation, which had included a special condition of 60 days’ incarceration, and which had already been served by the defendant, and imposed a further special condition of six months’ incarceration. Thus, the sentencing court has now added to the defendant’s original sentence a condition of incarceration in excess of six months, thus rendering it illegal (see, Penal Law § 60.01 [2] [d]; People v Jones, 72 AD2d 779). Therefore, we have reduced the further special condition of incarceration to a term of four months in order that the total period of incarceration will not exceed six months. Brown, J. P., Rubin, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

124 A.D.2d 760, 508 N.Y.S.2d 480, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 62077, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-vardaro-nyappdiv-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack