Opinion
July 12, 1991
Appeal from the Cattaraugus County Court, Kelly, J.
Present — Dillon, P.J., Doerr, Denman, Lawton and Davis, JJ.
Judgment unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed, in accordance with the following Memorandum: The Cattaraugus County District Attorney's Office and Sheriff's Department are not "victims" within the meaning of Penal Law § 60.27 (1); therefore, the court erred by ordering defendant to make restitution to these agencies of the expenses incurred in extraditing defendant from California to face felony charges. The court does not have authority to sentence defendant to reimburse a law enforcement agency for public monies expended as part of its law enforcement operating costs (see, People v Rowe, 152 A.D.2d 907, affd for reasons stated at App. Div. 75 N.Y.2d 948; People v Pfaudler, 164 A.D.2d 873; People v Purcell, 161 A.D.2d 812). That portion of the sentence must be vacated. In light of this determination, it is not necessary to address defendant's remaining argument.