People v. Porter, 95 A.D.3d 1450 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012). · Go Syfert
People v. Porter, 95 A.D.3d 1450 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
2 citation events across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: People v. Williams (nyappdiv, 2014-02-13)
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Williams
N.Y. App. Div. · 2014 · confidence medium
Nor do we find any merit to defendant’s claim that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel due to counsel’s failure to request an updated sentencing report (see People v Porter, 95 AD3d 1450, 1451 [2012], lv denied 19 NY3d 1000 [2012]).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) People v. Williams
N.Y. App. Div. · 2014 · confidence medium
Nor do we find any merit to defendant’s claim that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel due to counsel’s failure to request an updated sentencing report (see People v Porter, 95 AD3d 1450, 1451 [2012], lv denied 19 NY3d 1000 [2012]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
The People of the State of New York
v.
Larry Porter
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
May 10, 2012.
95 A.D.3d 1450
Malone.
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published
Malone Jr., J.

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Washington County (McKeighan, J.), rendered January 21, 2011, which resentenced defendant following his conviction of the crime of assault in the second degree (two counts).

In September 2011, while an inmate at Great Meadow Correctional Facility in Washington County, defendant was convicted of two counts of assault in the second degree and sentenced as a second felony offender to concurrent prison terms of seven years (People v Porter, 304 AD2d 845 [2003], lv denied 100 NY2d 565 [2003]). Upon learning that the mandatory periods of postrelease supervision had not been imposed, County Court resentenced defendant to his original sentence plus five years of postrelease supervision. Defendant appeals.

Although Penal Law § 70.85 permits County Court to reimpose the original sentence, without adding any postrelease supervision, the court may do so only with the People’s consent. Here, because there is no indication in the record that the People gave such consent, although they had the opportunity to do so, the court was required by law to impose upon defendant — a second felony offender convicted of violent felony offenses — a determinate sentence with postrelease supervision (see Penal Law § 70.00 [6]; § 70.06 [1] [a], [b]; § 70.45 [1]; see also People v Wright, 85 AD3d 1316, 1316 [2011]). As for defendant’s remaining contentions, the resentencing did not amount to a violation of his double jeopardy rights — indeed, a determinate sentence imposed without a period of postrelease supervision is an illegal sentence (see People v Williams, 14 NY3d 198, 217 [2010], cert denied 562 US —, 131 S Ct 125 [2010]) — and we are not persuaded that defendant was deprived of the effective assistance of counsel (see generally People v Caban, 5 NY3d 143, 152 [2005]; People v Wright, 85 AD3d at 1317).

Rose, J.P., Spain, Kavanagh and McCarthy, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.