People v. Young

88 A.D.3d 917, 931 N.Y.2d 880
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 18, 2011·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The defendant contends, and the People correctly concede, that contrary to the determination of the Supreme Court, his release to parole during the pendency of his motion for [918]*918resentencing pursuant to the Drug Law Reform Act of 2009, codified in CPL 440.46, did not render him ineligible for resentencing (see People v Santiago, 17 NY3d 246, 247-249 [2011]). Accordingly, we reverse the order appealed from, and remit the matter to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for further proceedings and a new determination of the defendant’s motion to be resentenced pursuant to CPL 440.46 (see People v Rivera, 88 AD3d 915 [2011] [decided herewith]). Mastro, J.P, Balkin, Chambers and Sgroi, JJ., concur.

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

People v. Young, 88 A.D.3d 917, 931 N.Y.2d 880 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

88 A.D.3d 917 (People v. Young) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Rivera
88 A.D.3d 915 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)