Opinion
2013-04-24
The PEOPLE, etc., respondent, v. Neil TUCKER, appellant.
Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Mark W. Vorkink of counsel), for appellant. Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Jodi L. Mandel of counsel), for respondent.
Lynn W.L. Fahey, New York, N.Y. (Mark W. Vorkink of counsel), for appellant. Charles J. Hynes, District Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Leonard Joblove and Jodi L. Mandel of counsel), for respondent.
Appeal by the defendant from a resentence of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Brennan, J.), imposed June 9, 2011, upon his conviction of robbery in the first degree, upon a jury verdict, the resentence being a period of postrelease supervision in addition to a determinate term of imprisonment previously imposed on July 29, 2002.
ORDERED that the resentence is affirmed.
Contrary to the defendant's contention, his resentencing to a term which included the statutorily required period of postrelease supervision did not subject him to double jeopardy or violate his right to due process of law since, at the time he was resentenced, he had not yet completed the sentence of imprisonment originally imposed upon him ( see People v. Lingle, 16 N.Y.3d 621, 630, 926 N.Y.S.2d 4, 949 N.E.2d 952;People v. Riley, 103 A.D.3d 818, 959 N.Y.S.2d 451;People v. Quinones, 103 A.D.3d 756, 958 N.Y.S.2d 907;People v. Lovett, 102 A.D.3d 812, 957 N.Y.S.2d 886;People v. Davis, 102 A.D.3d 808, 809, 957 N.Y.S.2d 891;People v. Harpe, 100 A.D.3d 657, 952 N.Y.S.2d 895,lv. denied20 N.Y.3d 1011, 960 N.Y.S.2d 355, 984 N.E.2d 330).