People v. Gillette
| Citation | 304 N.Y.S.2d 296,33 A.D.2d 587 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Bruce Edward GILLETTE, Appellant. |
| Decision Date | 20 October 1969 |
| Court | New York Supreme Court Appellate Division |
Daniel T. Manning, Essex County Dist. Atty., Daniel T. Manning, Jr., AuSable Forks, for respondent.
Charles P. Garvey, Port Henry, for appellant.
Before HERLIHY, P.J., and REYNOLDS, STALEY, GREENBLOTT and COOKE, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of conviction of the County Court of Essex County, rendered January 8, 1969, upon the resentencing of defendant.
The original sentence imposed by the court did not comply with subdivision 3 of section 70.00 of the Penal Law because the minimum term imposed was longer than one third of the maximum term imposed and the defendant was returned to the County Court for correction of the sentence. An erroneous sentence may be corrected by the sentencing court. (People ex rel. La Mere v. Jackson, 9 A.D.2d 843, 192 N.Y.S.2d 958; cf. People ex rel. Anderson v. Krueger, 30 A.D.2d 966, 294 N.Y.S.2d 648.) The defendant contends that since the maximum term (5 years) originally imposed by the court was within the provision of subdivision 2 of section 70.00 of the Penal Law, the court could not upon resentencing impose a longer maximum term. In our opinion a minimum term imposed by a court is an integral part of the entire sentence, so that an error as to it requires the court to reimpose the entire sentence. Accordingly, the court may, upon resentencing, impose a longer maximum term within the limits of section 70.00 of the Penal Law. (See People v. Harrington, 21 N.Y.2d 61, 64, 65, 286 N.Y.S.2d 477, 479, 481, 233 N.E.2d 456, 457, 458.)
Judgment affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Stewart v. Scully
...see, People v. Garcia, 121 A.D.2d 465, 466, 503 N.Y.S.2d 151, affd., 69 N.Y.2d 903, 516 N.Y.S.2d 194, 508 N.E.2d 929; People v. Gillette, 33 A.D.2d 587, 304 N.Y.S.2d 296; cf., People v. Miller, 65 N.Y.2d 502, 493 N.Y.S.2d 96, 482 N.E.2d 892; People v. Williams, 34 N.Y.2d 657, 355 N.Y.S.2d 5......
-
Meadows v. State, CR
...at the outset. People v. Wilson , 315 N.W.2d 423 (Misc. [Mich.]App.1981); Herring v. State, 411 So.2d 966 (Fla.1982); People v. Gillette , 304 N.Y.S.2d 296 (1969). Campbell v. State, 288 Ark. 213, 217, 703 S.W.2d 855, 857-858 (1986). Ordinarily, once a valid sentence has been placed in exec......
-
Campbell v. State, CR
...at the outset. People v. Wilson, 315 N.W.2d 423 (Misc.App.1981); Herring v. State, 411 So.2d 966 (Fla.1982); People v. Gillette, 33 A.D.2d 587, 304 N.Y.S.2d 296 (1969). There is another reason why the modification was not erroneous--the suspension of a part of the Class Y felony sentence is......
-
People v. Yannicelli
...court may impose additional terms of imprisonment, provided that the resentence itself is in accordance with statute. (People v. Gillette, 33 A.D.2d 587, 304 N.Y.S.2d 296; see, also, People v. Fink, 27 A.D.2d 893, 894, 277 N.Y.S.2d 1008, 1009--1010.) Here, there is no question but that the ......